# RESCUE CHARITY THOUGHTS ON THIS?



## Bertieb123 (19 April 2013)

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.


----------



## JillA (19 April 2013)

750 horses!?!?! Is that the right figure? Which charity is this please?


----------



## ExmoorHunter (19 April 2013)

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.


----------



## *hic* (19 April 2013)

It seems to be Hillside


----------



## JillA (19 April 2013)

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.


----------



## *hic* (19 April 2013)

JillA, Hillside is in Norfolk.


----------



## ExmoorHunter (19 April 2013)

It is Hillside - just checked their FB page.


----------



## suestowford (19 April 2013)

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?


----------



## Bertieb123 (19 April 2013)

jemima*askin said:



			It seems to be Hillside
		
Click to expand...

 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?


----------



## Archangel (19 April 2013)

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?  



JillA said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

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.  



JillA said:



			That particular one was experiencing problems with unexpected births too, as they were finding it impossible to separate the sexes.
		
Click to expand...

What a shambles.


----------



## ExmoorHunter (19 April 2013)

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.


----------



## Archangel (19 April 2013)

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?


----------



## Zero00000 (19 April 2013)

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!


----------



## JillA (19 April 2013)

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.


----------



## Alec Swan (19 April 2013)

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.


----------



## Beau jangles (19 April 2013)

Sell the sheep and cows for meat after all that's what they are bred for in Britain !


----------



## Moomin1 (19 April 2013)

Groan.

Hillside strike again.


----------



## Dizzle (19 April 2013)

"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.


----------



## Baggybreeches (19 April 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

Alec I entirely agree with you.


----------



## kateo (19 April 2013)

Sorry for my ignorance regarding this charity but why do they not rehome - do they have a reason?


----------



## MurphysMinder (19 April 2013)

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.


----------



## Red30563 (19 April 2013)

kateo said:



			Sorry for my ignorance regarding this charity but why do they not rehome - do they have a reason?
		
Click to expand...

^^^ 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.


----------



## Maesfen (19 April 2013)

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.


----------



## Merlin11 (19 April 2013)

Beau jangles said:



			Sell the sheep and cows for meat after all that's what they are bred for in Britain !
		
Click to expand...


Agree with this and I am normally a fluffy bunny. I don't get charities that keep loads of cows and sheep. Or give them to real farmers as Alec says.


----------



## SusannaF (19 April 2013)

RebelRebel said:



			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?
		
Click to expand...

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.


----------



## Bertieb123 (19 April 2013)

MurphysMinder said:



			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.

Click to expand...

 I do wonder if you would have had the same response if you were offering a amount of money to aid their cause?


----------



## YorksG (19 April 2013)

SusannaF said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

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


----------



## Adopter (20 April 2013)

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.


----------



## Zero00000 (20 April 2013)

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


----------



## Alec Swan (20 April 2013)

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.


----------



## Zero00000 (20 April 2013)

I agree, I mean who honestly thinks running a holiday home alongside a 'sanctuary' is a good idea... surely thats eating up funds! 
Among many other things, just after seeing that on their website, im a little stumped!


----------



## muff747 (20 April 2013)

Surely it would be impossible to care for all those animals properly?  Like someone else said, there must be animals there that are neglected, they can't possibly monitor each individual animal.
The cows and sheep are possibly more accustomed to living out 24/7 although in this weather, farmers usually keep cows in over winter if only to save the land getting trashed.  They would need more feed if kept out as well.
Not all horses/ponies are equiped to stay out 24/7, even if they have well sheltered fields, some would need rugs - how could they possibly check that all the horses were comfortable??
It sound like madness and I am very concerned about the welfare of that number of animals.


----------



## Norfolk Pie (20 April 2013)

Beau jangles said:



			Sell the sheep and cows for meat after all that's what they are bred for in Britain !
		
Click to expand...

My understanding is Hillside rescue dogs are fed a vegetarian diet, because those in charge believe it is cruel to slaughter animals for consumption.
I don't know this for sure, but it was a fairly reliable source who told me.

Someone tried to give an unridable horse to tem last year - fortunately Hillside got strangles and I persuaded owner to PTS, for which I feel no guilt what so ever - poor horse ad a lucky escape.  "Rescue" centres like this make me cross - if all the donations to these jokers went to WHW, they could do much more good for welfare


----------



## perfect11s (20 April 2013)

Im not sure in this case but it seems alot of these so called "rescue" centers are based on a  limited grasp of reality , by well meaning people  and sometimes  nut jobs ..  difficult  to critisise when so many pet and animal owners cannot or will not make the right desision for their unwanted or sick animals  wont PTS and then pass the problem on to others ... we all have our part to play and should take responsibilty for our actions...


----------



## Alec Swan (20 April 2013)

From a similar but undated plea for more funds,  I've just drawn the attached;

_"  Thankfully, up until now, our suppliers have been understanding of our situation but, we realise that they cannot afford to support us any longer. Crisis point was reached when we received a letter from our vets suggesting that, to save us from going further in the red, they put to sleep any animals needing critical care instead of treating them. As you can imagine, this is unthinkable."
_

"Unthinkable"?  Unthinkable to ignore the advice of a competent and qualified Veterinary practice?  Actually,  they're probably right,  can you imagine the effect that listening to sound advice would have upon their fund raising? 

And these people expect the respect and support of the public?  Really?

Alec.


----------



## s4sugar (20 April 2013)

Don't this lot have untagged farm animals?


----------



## misterjinglejay (20 April 2013)

Is it any wonder that with charities (or limited companies) around like this, that JJ and RJ are in trouble, rescuing all and sundry from the evil meatman?

What is so wrong with sensible, checked out rehoming, or even PTS?


----------



## Bertieb123 (20 April 2013)

The more I look at Hillside the more concerning it is, rescue dogs fed a Vegan diet? dogs are designed to eat meat for heavens sake! is this not a welfare issue in itself not allowing an animal to show natural behaviour, by eating its natural diet? amongst many other things what are these people actually trying to do apart from putting their own personal views above the views of all the animals they 'rescue' and from where I am seeing it compromise their welfare and natural way of life how on earth do they look after all these animals? do they get one to one attention? as for the farm animals they have, agree with Alec on that one, like it or not cattle, sheep, pigs are bred to eat etc, if we all stopped eating them they would not exist at all. How many of these animals need veterinary attention I wonder, if they finding it hard to pay feed bills, it will also be difficult to pay vet bills and with that many animals, with some aged there would be problems very concerned about this 'sanctury'


----------



## Adopter (20 April 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			From a similar but undated plea for more funds,  I've just drawn the attached;

_"  Thankfully, up until now, our suppliers have been understanding of our situation but, we realise that they cannot afford to support us any longer. Crisis point was reached when we received a letter from our vets suggesting that, to save us from going further in the red, they put to sleep any animals needing critical care instead of treating them. As you can imagine, this is unthinkable."
_

"Unthinkable"?  Unthinkable to ignore the advice of a competent and qualified Veterinary practice?  Actually,  they're probably right,  can you imagine the effect that listening to sound advice would have upon their fund raising? 

And these people expect the respect and support of the public?  Really?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

So what happens when they don't pay their bills, will they be bankrupt, and then who sorts out the animals?  Agree with you can not respect or agree with their approach.


----------



## Penny Less (20 April 2013)

Re how can they look after 750 horses, I believe Redwings have more than 1200


----------



## Red30563 (20 April 2013)

Adopter said:



			I had not realised Hillside /Redwings link, I never supported Redwings in the days when they did not rehome.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think the two charities are linked nowadays. I may be incorrect, but I believe it was the founder of Redwings who left and formed Hillside. 

Has anyone ever visited Hillside on one of their open days? I'm almost tempted to go, just to see what it is really like there.


----------



## Cuffey (20 April 2013)

alma said:



			Re how can they look after 750 horses, I believe Redwings have more than 1200
		
Click to expand...

Thoughts

Hillside do not loan out so continue to grow, there is one lady trying to get her horse back from Hillside and having no success (the horse became a welfare case out on loan and it took the owner a long time to find it)

Hillside took in the Shires from Bolton area, when you see what Vicky Fowler has achieved with Hope, I find it sad that the others are just ''existing''

Hillside and Redwings are totally separate

Did Hillside really need to spend money importing East European Dogs?


----------



## hairycob (20 April 2013)

Are they  the ones that have a visitor centre in North Norfolk. If it is I have visited there and had a few head-wall moments when reading some of their propaganda - e.g. the rabbits that were rescued from being killed for meat


----------



## EAST KENT (20 April 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			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?  



Alec.
		
Click to expand...

That is the fate of anything,club,charity ,whatever..why politics even!


----------



## SusannaF (20 April 2013)

I just wonder if they want to rescue ALL the farm animals in the UK, and how they were going to do that


----------



## JanetGeorge (20 April 2013)

SusannaF said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

An animal welfare charity CAN do 'political' campaigning as long as it is about their main purpose (i.e. animal welfare!)  Look at the RSPCA!!  What they cannot do is show political bias to any political party.

I suspect the reason Hillside is NOT a charity is because its founder wants to stay in control of it!  Redwings became a charity and presumably - with a number of trustees having a say - the founder got the elbow.  Redwings used not be able to rehome - but they put a good case to the Charity Commissioners and were able to change that part of their Articles.


----------



## Ancient Hacker (20 April 2013)

As a matter of interest, how much land do the two rescue centres on this thread have?  Am I right in understanding one has 1200 horses, and then Hillside have 750 horse in addition to goats, rabbits, cattle etc.... They would need a lot of land to keep the horses, without considering the rest of the animals.


----------



## Elsiecat (20 April 2013)

Someone commented asking why they don't rehome any animals and got absolutely jumped on various times 

Ok, this 'charity' is 'rescueing' cattle. Cattle = food. Send them to slaughter. Keeping all that cattle for the sake of keeping cattle is barmy.

Having that many horses and not rehoming them is bloody stupid. Surely the idea of a rescue is to take on horses that are in need of rescueing, working with them and finding them a loving home where they will receive plenty of love and attention by owners that can afford, both financially and time-wise, to take care of them? 

So basically, they are just a group of people with far too many pets that expect others to pay for said pets. They obviously can't afford vet fees if they can't afford hay. When was the last time all 750 horses had the farrier? or worming? or teeth?

Oddest grounds for a charity I've come across in a very long time. If anyone wants to back a horse charity can I suggest Prince Fluffy Kareem or WHW?

I, for one, fancy a few more horses. I can't afford the hay though, so you lot will have to fund it. Vets fees, farrier fees, etc will just have to whistle.


----------



## Bertieb123 (20 April 2013)

Out of interest on these open day's do the public get to see ALL the animals?


----------



## Archangel (20 April 2013)

alma said:



			Re how can they look after 750 horses, I believe Redwings have more than 1200
		
Click to expand...

A quick look at their accounts (Redwings) their income in last financial year was nearly £9 million  They have £24 million in reserve


----------



## YorksG (20 April 2013)

I presume that redwings continue to own the horses they re-home, so although they have so many on paper I doubt that they actually have the horses there physically. Redwings also offer education and advice to horse owners who are having problems. I doubt if Hillside can offer any sensible advice to anyone regarding horse welfare.


----------



## Adopter (20 April 2013)

I have been following Redwings, WHW, Blue Cross and others on Facebook, they are all offering horse and ponies for rehomeing having spent time at their rehoming centres for training, recovery etc.

Redwings does seem to be a very big concern, but they also have their own vets who give lectures etc to inform others.  

I have visited the Blue Cross Rehoming Centre at Rolleston, they have open afternoons every week, and you can see all the horses and ponies in the yard, and in the fields.

According to NFU countryside mag, 6 of the equine charities working together for the current horse rehoming crisis have had recognition for their work.  Hillside were not  part of the group.


----------



## leah_x (20 April 2013)

Redwings have over 1300 horses but many different sites to keep them on. 
Hillside has over 2000 animals in their care (according to website) and I don't think they have anywhere near the same amount of land that Redwings does, so I have no idea how they would manage that many animals, 700 being horses. 

I dislike the fact that I once contacted them asking if they had any jobs, they loved the sound of me with my experience, until I said I had been hunting while working in a racing yard (never took part just went as a groom really) they may aswell have hung up on me. Fair enough they have strong opinions on things, but just because I worked in racing does not mean I am an animal abuser.


----------



## hackneylass2 (21 April 2013)

I now have emails and through the post newsletters from Hillside after signing their Turners petition (and I absolutely believe that Turners is a shambles and needs to be shut) but thats as maybe, 

why don't Hillside rehome?
If they can email supporters, why spend money needlessly on snail mail and paper?

And, I wondered, why do they not take in and rehome cats?  Is it because they cannot exist on a vegetarian or vegan diet?  Do any of the Hillside lot run cars?  Have they all found vegan tyres?

Weird, I supported their petition but won't support their ongoing 'charity'.


----------



## Cuffey (21 April 2013)

Adopter said:



			I have been following Redwings, WHW, Blue Cross and others on Facebook, they are all offering horse and ponies for rehomeing having spent time at their rehoming centres for training, recovery etc.

According to NFU countryside mag, 6 of the equine charities working together for the current horse rehoming crisis have had recognition for their work.  Hillside were not  part of the group.
		
Click to expand...

Assume you mean National Equine Welfare council--full membership for registered charities only and Hillside choose not to be registered

http://www.newc.co.uk/members/eligibility-criteria/


----------



## SusannaF (21 April 2013)

RebelRebel said:



			A quick look at their accounts (Redwings) their income in last financial year was nearly £9 million  They have £24 million in reserve 

Click to expand...

Yep, Redwings don't do anything they can't afford. And their facilities are incredible. I had a tour of their HQ and saw the vet surgery, the retraining barn, the "intensive care" area and acres of post and rail fencing. They have (I think) a couple of fulltime vets and a dozen or so vet nurses, and Rossdales on hand if they can't deal with something in their own surgery. It's impressive.


----------



## Bertieb123 (23 April 2013)

Was very sad again today and looked at the Hillside page, changed the pic to a very old Bull they 'rescued' and still begging for money and food? Yes I think I was very silly when I first thought this group were sensible! they still have the petition about shutting Turners down on there? was shut a few weeks ago wasn't it? If I thought about the term pulling your hair out I for one would be bald by now!


----------



## competitiondiva (23 April 2013)

I read only recently on this forum that this charity could do no wrong when people were slating a certain other one! Now it seems they're not such a fantastic charity after all? I'm rather astounded at what I've read here.  I agree for once with Alec Swan!!


----------



## Adopter (23 April 2013)

Did you see the item in H&H news that a 48hr foal found in river in east London, been taken in to be hand reared by Redwings, at least they have the knowledge to help.  Poor little thing, how someone could do such a thing is beyond me.


----------



## wallykissmas (24 April 2013)

Redwings and hillside are no longer connected. It is rumoured that hillsides owner was asked to give up the position at redwings due to financial claims.

Hillside horses are scattered around the Norwich countryside , knee deep in mud until, feb time when they decided to put straw around the hay feeders - however the ones in field down little lanes that the visitors do not see have no where near as much as the others on the main yard.

The fields seem to be full of coloured cob types, lot look young, there are often new ones added weekly and can even been seen in the owners drive way. 

The fields down lanes are full of barbed wire and its very sad to see that with some one to one these horses could be knee deep in straw, hay and human attention instead of mud and poo. 

They haven't been rescued they are just suffering at the hands of another human who is addicted to buying/owning horses.

They have no grass on their field and there must be at least 20 horses on five acres ...


----------



## Adopter (24 April 2013)

Really sad to read the above.

I was reading on WHW site tonight about 2 horses in London, who were chained to the wheels of cars in front of a house, and one had caught his head and could not move!  The owner was proposing to leave them there for several days whilst he build a shed, after WHW intervention and advice they have now been moved to a field.


----------



## Bertieb123 (27 April 2013)

This is what I suspected after reading things about Hillside, and the founder, worrying thing is so many people giving money to this so called sanctuary, and seem to think their money is being well spent. Um I suspect it is someone on a big ego trip thinking everyone agrees with their views at the compromise of animal welfare.

They haven't been rescued they are just suffering at the hands of another human who is addicted to buying/owning horses.


wallykissmas said:



			Redwings and hillside are no longer connected. It is rumoured that hillsides owner was asked to give up the position at redwings due to financial claims.

Hillside horses are scattered around the Norwich countryside , knee deep in mud until, feb time when they decided to put straw around the hay feeders - however the ones in field down little lanes that the visitors do not see have no where near as much as the others on the main yard.

The fields seem to be full of coloured cob types, lot look young, there are often new ones added weekly and can even been seen in the owners drive way. 

The fields down lanes are full of barbed wire and its very sad to see that with some one to one these horses could be knee deep in straw, hay and human attention instead of mud and poo..

They have no grass on their field and there must be at least 20 horses on five acres ...
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Alec Swan (27 April 2013)

Bertieb123 said:



			......., worrying thing is so many people giving money to this so called sanctuary, and seem to think their money is being well spent. 

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

I agree with you,  but that poses the question,  just which charity would you donate to?  

Hillside,  as you've said.  They are,  or should be at risk of prosecution,  and would be if the rspca weren't so spineless.  They have no regard for the Law,  what so ever.

Redwings have an annual income of £3 MILLION,  and reserves of £24 MILLION,  we have families in this country,  who through no fault of their own are on the bread line,  so do they really need further funding?

The rspca,  whilst cutting back as fast as they can,  and virtually franchising their centres,  having spent circa £4 MILLION on a new head office,  can still find in excess of £236 THOUSAND pounds to bring about a politically motivated and pointless prosecution.  Do they need our hard earned money?

The lacs,  are already heavily funded by left wing lunatics,  who stand by and watch the most appalling abuse of deer within their "sanctuary".  Do they deserve support?  Do they ****.

Let me see now,  who else is there?  Every now and then when we shop in Morrisons,  there are animal charity volunteers standing at the exit,  rattling their tins.  I always explain that what ever spare funds I have,  I give to those charities which support children.  They rarely look too impressed!

Alec.


----------



## Bertieb123 (27 April 2013)

Not wanting to sound mean I do not donate to ANY charities, though I do sponsor people who do things for a limited few of them and I volunteer for many things in my local community, I agree Alec (and its why I don't donate to charity organisations) some of these large organisations have so much money they don't know what to do with it apart from pay their chief executive and staff a huge salary and ignore what they were originally set up to do. As for places like Hillside I personally think they need looking into.



Alec Swan said:



			I agree with you,  but that poses the question,  just which charity would you donate to?  

Hillside,  as you've said.  They are,  or should be at risk of prosecution,  and would be if the rspca weren't so spineless.  They have no regard for the Law,  what so ever.

Redwings have an annual income of £3 MILLION,  and reserves of £24 MILLION,  we have families in this country,  who through no fault of their own are on the bread line,  so do they really need further funding?

The rspca,  whilst cutting back as fast as they can,  and virtually franchising their centres,  having spent circa £4 MILLION on a new head office,  can still find in excess of £236 THOUSAND pounds to bring about a politically motivated and pointless prosecution.  Do they need our hard earned money?

The lacs,  are already heavily funded by left wing lunatics,  who stand by and watch the most appalling abuse of deer within their "sanctuary".  Do they deserve support?  Do they ****.

Let me see now,  who else is there?  Every now and then when we shop in Morrisons,  there are animal charity volunteers standing at the exit,  rattling their tins.  I always explain that what ever spare funds I have,  I give to those charities which support children.  They rarely look too impressed!

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Amymay (27 April 2013)

The financial issues you hint at Wally are not as sinister as you might think.


----------



## wallykissmas (27 April 2013)

Hmmm whenyou pass their many field and houses on a daily bases what ever money they had doesn't appear to exist any longer.


----------



## Amymay (27 April 2013)

That's not what you were alluding to though, was it?


----------



## MillyMoomie (27 April 2013)

Apologies in advance Alec.

This is what you donate to.

http://youtu.be/PZLR-0mRSkM


----------



## Alec Swan (27 April 2013)

MillyMoomie said:



			Apologies in advance Alec.

This is what you donate to.

http://youtu.be/PZLR-0mRSkM

Click to expand...

As a courtesy to you,  I watched your youtube piece.  Unfortunately,  life isn't like that,  for most of the time.  Would you like me to put together a similar piece,  but including the rspca failures?  The failures are legion,  even though you _may_ chose to ignore them.  

The major failing,  of your charity,  in my view,  is that the senior management are hopeless,  they direct a charity which is more interested in fund raising than animal welfare,  and they are,  in short an embarrassment.  With replaced senior management,  replaced by those who are able to focus upon the core ideals of your society,  and the RSPCA will have my unqualified support.

Thos individual inspectors,  those who operate and are the face that the public see,  have a degree of respect.  Hampered though they are by halfwits,  the bulk of them soldier on,  and again,  one cannot but admire their stoicism.

M_M,  you and I will never see eye to eye,  on this matter.  We both see the charity which you support,  from totally converging viewpoints,  and it's highly unlikely that we will find common ground.  Well,  not until you come to your senses!  (That's a joke,  before you go in to orbit!).

Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (27 April 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			....... from totally *converging* viewpoints,  .......

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

That should have read,  Opposing,  not Converging!! 

Alec.


----------



## Moomin1 (27 April 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			Thos individual inspectors,  those who operate and are the face that the public see,  have a degree of respect.  Hampered though they are by halfwits,  the bulk of them soldier on,  and again,  one cannot but admire their stoicism.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Your arrogance and ignorance shines through again Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (27 April 2013)

Moomin1 said:



			Your arrogance and ignorance shines through again Alec.
		
Click to expand...

How kind and thoughtful of you!   Having personally witnessed the direct incompetence of rspca inspectors,  on several occasions,  I wouldn't say that "ignorance" was actually the right word.  "Experienced" might have been a better choice. 

Arrogance?  Now that's a different matter,  and to it you might have added my further qualities.  I'm bombastic,  boastful,  conceited,  irritable and irritating,  pompous,  self opinionated and on occasions,  a bore.  

Apart from being considered to still be good looking,  and wealthy,  I think that the above cataloguing of my qualities,  is a fair and honest resume!  Doubtless you'll be able to extend the list. 

Alec.


----------



## Moomin1 (27 April 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			How kind and thoughtful of you!   Having personally witnessed the direct incompetence of rspca inspectors,  on several occasions,  I wouldn't say that "ignorance" was actually the right word.  "Experienced" might have been a better choice. 

Arrogance?  Now that's a different matter,  and to it you might have added my further qualities.  I'm bombastic,  boastful,  conceited,  irritable and irritating,  pompous,  self opinionated and on occasions,  a bore.  

Apart from being considered to still be good looking,  and wealthy,  I think that the above cataloguing of my qualities,  is a fair and honest resume!  Doubtless you'll be able to extend the list. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Well I suppose everyone has the odd redeeming quality


----------



## Alec Swan (27 April 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			.......

Thos individual inspectors,  those who operate and are the face that the public see,  have a degree of respect.  Hampered though they are by halfwits,  the bulk of them soldier on,  and again,  one cannot but admire their stoicism.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...




Moomin1 said:



			Your arrogance and ignorance shines through again Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Oh dear,  it's just occurred to me,  I was wondering why you seemed to be quite so cross;  You're not one of the "Halfwits" I referred to,  are you?  That can be the only reason,  that I can see. 

Alec.


----------



## Ancient Hacker (28 April 2013)

Can someone please help me out here with regard to the principles relating to rescue charities. I'm not referring to any specific organisations (especially as I don't live in the UK, but I do spend some time there). 

Am I correct that if you register an entity as a charity, you will effectively forfeit any real privacy in your financial dealings and be held to a higher level of scrutiny than, for example, a private limited company?

Simply stated, a person or group could register a private limited company to rescue horses (dogs, cats, rats, whatever they want) and could invite anyone to donate hay, cash etc. They would not be accountable for what they receive by way of donations, would they? However if the entity is a registered charity then proper accounting for all donations and expenditure etc would be required ie full transparency.

Do I understand this correctly, as I've tried to outline above, or am I wrong?


----------



## Moomin1 (28 April 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			Oh dear,  it's just occurred to me,  I was wondering why you seemed to be quite so cross;  You're not one of the "Halfwits" I referred to,  are you?  That can be the only reason,  that I can see. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Do you know, you are very young for your age Alec!


----------



## Alec Swan (28 April 2013)

Ancient Hacker said:



			.......

Simply stated, a person or group could register a private limited company to rescue horses (dogs, cats, rats, whatever they want) and could invite anyone to donate hay, cash etc. 

They would not be accountable for what they receive by way of donations, would they? However if the entity is a registered charity then proper accounting for all donations and expenditure etc would be required ie full transparency.

.....
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure of the answers,  but I suspect that if you have a Limited Company,  you would be responsible for having audited accounts.

Any monies changing hands,  by way of donations,  would need to be included in the accounts which,  registered as a charity or not,  would need to be declared to HMRC.  That's what I think,  but I'm not certain.

Alec.


----------



## wallykissmas (28 April 2013)

amymay said:



			That's not what you were alluding to though, was it?
		
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you have lost me , what do you think I was alluding too ?


----------



## Ancient Hacker (28 April 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			I'm not sure of the answers,  but I suspect that if you have a Limited Company,  you would be responsible for having audited accounts.

Any monies changing hands,  by way of donations,  would need to be included in the accounts which,  registered as a charity or not,  would need to be declared to HMRC.  That's what I think,  but I'm not certain.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


Hello Alec, thank you for your response.  I'm sure all business entities will require audited AFS etc, particularly for tax purposes. However, if you and I decided to incorporate a private limited company to operate a rescue operation for horses and hounds (simply by way of example) but we didn't register as a charity, we would be obliged to declare all donations and benefits received. Whether we did in fact declare them is another matter entirely,of course. But if we did not register as a charity then - as I understand it - there are no checks and balances in place to ensure that we're not using the donations primarily towards our own animals and their vet bills, building an indoor arena for our own use etc and generally improving our private property at the expense of misguided but generous members of the public.

I think I might be right in the above example, so I'm off to set up a FaceBook page, to hurry along the urgent support I need for my air-conditioned indoor arena. My horses just mentioned, in passing, that it's a bit hot so a horsepool might be handy, too.  But seriously, in the example I've given it would be easy to improve our own equestrian estate at the cost of others, wouldn't it?

I still don't understand why people insist on giving to entities that are not proper, registered charities. Maybe I'm just a cynical Old Hacker!


----------



## Maesfen (28 April 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			Arrogance?  Now that's a different matter,  and to it you might have added my further qualities.  I'm bombastic,  boastful,  conceited,  irritable and irritating,  pompous,  self opinionated and on occasions,  a bore.  

Apart from being considered to still be good looking,  and wealthy,  I think that the above cataloguing of my qualities,  is a fair and honest resume!  Doubtless you'll be able to extend the list. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

But that's why we love you Alec.


----------



## Bertieb123 (28 April 2013)

Alec, I for one can agree too this I have also had experience of the RSPCA and their inspectors and so have others I know and some things are shocking especially when the evidence of abuse has been there plain to see, perhaps the inspectors are out of their depth or they told not to take on cases that are not straight forward (cost money) or perhaps there not the media there to log it, I cannot answer to why sometimes they turn a blind eye, perhaps someone can? 



Alec Swan said:



			How kind and thoughtful of you!   Having personally witnessed the direct incompetence of rspca inspectors,  on several occasions,  I wouldn't say that "ignorance" was actually the right word.  "Experienced" might have been a better choice. 

Arrogance?  Now that's a different matter,  and to it you might have added my further qualities.  I'm bombastic,  boastful,  conceited,  irritable and irritating,  pompous,  self opinionated and on occasions,  a bore.  

Apart from being considered to still be good looking,  and wealthy,  I think that the above cataloguing of my qualities,  is a fair and honest resume!  Doubtless you'll be able to extend the list. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

 No Alec, I don't know you personally but there is no way I would call you them things! If people think that then that's their problem, We all have an opinion and sometimes people don't like that! LOL!


----------



## Bertieb123 (28 April 2013)

Ancient Hacker said:



			Hello Alec, thank you for your response.  I'm sure all business entities will require audited AFS etc, particularly for tax purposes. However, if you and I decided to incorporate a private limited company to operate a rescue operation for horses and hounds (simply by way of example) but we didn't register as a charity, we would be obliged to declare all donations and benefits received. Whether we did in fact declare them is another matter entirely,of course. But if we did not register as a charity then - as I understand it - there are no checks and balances in place to ensure that we're not using the donations primarily towards our own animals and their vet bills, building an indoor arena for our own use etc and generally improving our private property at the expense of misguided but generous members of the public.

I think I might be right in the above example, so I'm off to set up a FaceBook page, to hurry along the urgent support I need for my air-conditioned indoor arena. My horses just mentioned, in passing, that it's a bit hot so a horsepool might be handy, too.  But seriously, in the example I've given it would be easy to improve our own equestrian estate at the cost of others, wouldn't it?

I still don't understand why people insist on giving to entities that are not proper, registered charities. Maybe I'm just a cynical Old Hacker! 

Click to expand...

No not a cynical Old Hacker, a good point.


----------



## rascal (4 May 2013)

I have also witnessed the incompetence of the good old rspca.
I met wendy valentine a couple of times about 20 yrs ago, seemed to have some odd ideas, one of them not rehoming.


----------

