# Not RSPCA bashing,  but.......



## Alec Swan (25 June 2013)

I would very much like to hear from those who support the charity in question,  just how they would offer a counter claim to the argument which I recently found,  and I've copied below.  I'd also like to hear from those who support the rspca,  whether they actually offer their full support to Gavin Grant,  or whether they'd prefer to see a wider quantifiable section of our population offer greater support to their charity. 

I would very much like to support an animal welfare charity,  but one which is fit for purpose,  and I'm sure that I'm not alone.

Alec.

________________

*How long before Grant is shown the door?*

_Simon Baseley	1:43pm, 21st May 2013
You cannot see trustees of the RSPCA allowing things to carry on as they are for too much longer. Grappling with mounting running costs which have led to redundancies among its 1500 or so employees, even its most ardent supporters will have looked on aghast as it has frittered away hundreds of thousands of pounds pursuing fatally flawed legal actions. It is a little known fact that the RSPCA is the UKs biggest private litigant, spending heavily each year on rightly prosecuting those who have mistreated animals. But since the arrival of chief executive, Gavin Grant, at the beginning of 2012, the RSPCA seems to have lost sight of its real purpose bringing with it the accusation that Lib Dem supporter, Grant, a virulent opponent of field sports generally and fox hunting in particular, is pursuing a political agenda; something strictly forbidden under Charity Commission rules.
Last month the latest case to turn sour left the charity with a £100,000 bill after a North Wiltshire court heard that charges against two Vale of Avon huntsmen, relating to alleged breaches the hunting act, were to be dropped. The judge in the case criticised the charity for wasting its time and refused to award costs in its favour. This action follows hard on the heels of £300,000 bill arising from the failed prosecution of the Heythrop Hunt plus whatever the costs accrued from the distinctly unsavoury case of huntsman Brian Nuttalls dog, Topic. The dog was seized by the RSPCA after Mr Nuttall was accused of interfering with a badger sett. Almost predictably the three RSPCA witnesses, each gave differing accounts of the circumstances, with the result that the RSPCA dropped the case. However it then took it more than a year to return Mr Nuttall's dog.
Never mind the way it squanders money, there is something very distinctly Orwellian about the charitys behaviour. And clearly others think so too. Reports indicate its income has fallen alarmingly. It can only be a matter of time before Mr Grant is given the opportunity to pursue other interests._


----------



## JanetGeorge (25 June 2013)

It's a sweet little article but Simon Baseley fails to appreciate that the RSPCA has been run by AR nutters for years!  Grant was the sort of CE the nutters wanted - that's why they hired him - and why they haven't sacked him!


----------



## Echo Bravo (25 June 2013)

And that is one of the many reasons, why I no longer support the RSPCA


----------



## Alec Swan (26 June 2013)

Really,  my question is,  does Grant have the full support of the rank and file of those who work for the rspca?  

Because I have no dealings with the charity,  I wonder how far down the chain of command,  the right to vote reaches.

Does the right to vote within the charity extend beyond the more fanatical animal right activists,  or if not activists,  those who offer tacit support.

I'm also wondering just how many well intentioned outsiders it would take to persuade a change of course away from the limiting and stifling,  politically and fanatically influenced members,  and return the charity to it's former policies.

Alec.


----------



## Moomin1 (26 June 2013)

I think people are getting a bit bored of this now.


----------



## Mrs B (26 June 2013)

Moomin1 said:



			I think people are getting a bit bored of this now.

Click to expand...

Not at all. I think we're rather bored by the fact that you (without question) stick up for a (very) flawed charity, come hell or high water.

I take it that you work for them, Moomin?


----------



## Superhot (26 June 2013)

I'm a home checker for them. I don't get involved in politics etc, just do my bit to help abandoned and cruelly treated animals a fresh chance in life. I do get upset when I hear stories of the RSPCA not attending situations where the animals so desperately need them.  In my local area, they are very good, and if I gave up helping them in my own small way, who would be the ones to suffer?  The animals of course, so I carry on regardless...


----------



## Luci07 (26 June 2013)

Superhot said:



			I'm a home checker for them. I don't get involved in politics etc, just do my bit to help abandoned and cruelly treated animals a fresh chance in life. I do get upset when I hear stories of the RSPCA not attending situations where the animals so desperately need them.  In my local area, they are very good, and if I gave up helping them in my own small way, who would be the ones to suffer?  The animals of course, so I carry on regardless...
		
Click to expand...

But isn't this part of Alec's point? How much impact do the local offices actually have.  It is too much of a curates egg atm and the good is being overshadowed by the flawed.  I had one direct dealing with the RSPCA..and the guy went well and truly over and above board to help me with 2 abandoned Shetlands.  Detest the political agenda though and feel it detracts from the real people on the ground, who want to make a difference.


----------



## Moomin1 (26 June 2013)

Mrs B said:



			Not at all. I think we're rather bored by the fact that you (without question) stick up for a (very) flawed charity, come hell or high water.

I take it that you work for them, Moomin?
		
Click to expand...

Well, maybe Alec shouldn't ask the original question then, if you are all bored of hearing from people who support the work of the RSPCA?

In any case, my opinion is mine, yours is yours.  I didn't realise you were the 
opinion police! 

And no.


----------



## Goldenstar (26 June 2013)

I have no kids and have left a lot of money to various charity's I left money to the RSPCA even after the hunting ban as a mark of respect to the people I worked alongside when I was involved in welfare work. 
I changed it a little while ago and have found some new charities to support on event of me popping of unexpectedly. I don't expect ever to change this view now I fear it's all gone to far.


----------



## pip6 (27 June 2013)

I have personally had a bad experience with them (I reported a starvation case), that could have left me in danger from a person with psycholocical issues. I can appreciate that there are people who work for them who just want to help the animals, but question some of the attitudes / directives it works to. Given the number of animal charities about, I find it much easier to buy cat food & take it to my local CPL branch. That way I know exactly how my donation is being used. It is going directly to the animals.


----------



## Alec Swan (27 June 2013)

Moomin1 said:



			I think people are getting a bit bored of this now.

Click to expand...

You may have misunderstood,  or misread my questions.  I'll ask them again;  

Do you or those who support the rspca offer Gavin Grant your unqualified support?

Do you believe that the rspca uses it's available funds in a correct manner?

With your apparent in depth knowledge of the rspca,  would you suggest that those who act as spectators could have any influence over what many perceive as a flawed and ethically corrupt charity which is very poorly led.

Do you and those others who support the rspca honestly believe that the initial remit of the society,  when it was first formed,  is still the path which is being followed?



Moomin1 said:



			Well, maybe Alec shouldn't ask the original question then, if you are all bored of hearing from people who support the work of the RSPCA?

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

On the contrary,  I'm not bored of your support for the rspca,  I'd be grateful if you could answer my questions in a direct manner.

None of my comments are intended as criticism of the rank and file staff of the rspca,  but they are directed at those who seem to be using the charity to serve their own agendas.

Alec.


----------



## Superhot (27 June 2013)

Sorry Alec, my answer wasn't meant as a cop out.  I guess in truth your questions are thoughts I've had but tried to avoid analyzing.  If the RSPCA don't,illegal hunters to court, who will?  It makes a mockery of making hunting foxes illegal. 
 I attended a meeting in Ipswich a few months ago, about stopping the live transportation of animals overseas for slaughter.  It was thought that the hauliers might try and use Ipswich docks after a terrible incident at Ramsgate.  Gavin Grant came and spoke very passionately and eloquently I thought.  He did enough work behind the scenes, supported by other animal welfare organisations and our local MP, Ben Gummer, to prevent Ipswich Docks ever being used.  I think on that basis alone, I have faith in the man and that he has animal welfare at the heart of what he does.  
I have to trust that the money they receive is well spent for the good of the animals they seek to protect.  If it was proven to me that this was not the case, and that by helping them in my mown small way, I was enabling them to line their own pockets or misuse funds, then I would have to stop bsupportung them, and give my time and efforts to help one of the other many worthy charities.
Yes, I do believe they care still following their original remit.  Hand on heart, I could not do the work of any of their inspectors...


----------



## happyhunter123 (27 June 2013)

Superhot said:



			If the RSPCA don't,illegal hunters to court, who will?
		
Click to expand...

The League, IFAW, and the CPS


----------



## Fellewell (27 June 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			You may have misunderstood,  or misread my questions.  I'll ask them again;  

Do you or those who support the rspca offer Gavin Grant your unqualified support?

Do you believe that the rspca uses it's available funds in a correct manner?

With your apparent in depth knowledge of the rspca,  would you suggest that those who act as spectators could have any influence over what many perceive as a flawed and ethically corrupt charity which is very poorly led.

Do you and those others who support the rspca honestly believe that the initial remit of the society,  when it was first formed,  is still the path which is being followed?
On the contrary,  I'm not bored of your support for the rspca,  I'd be grateful if you could answer my questions in a direct manner.

None of my comments are intended as criticism of the rank and file staff of the rspca,  but they are directed at those who seem to be using the charity to serve their own agendas.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I expect you've seen it but there was an excellent article written by Melissa Kite in The Spectator 2/2/13 on this subject.


----------



## Alec Swan (27 June 2013)

Superhot said:



			Sorry Alec, my answer wasn't meant as a cop out.  I guess in truth your questions are thoughts I've had but tried to avoid analyzing.  If the RSPCA don't,illegal hunters to court, who will?  It makes a mockery of making hunting foxes illegal.  

*The Crown Prosecution Service works towards a system of transparent justice and is answerable to Society in general.  The rspca cannot claim to be even handed,  or even ethical in their attempts at prosecution,  and it seems to me that they answer to no one.  I support hunting,  though I don't hunt,  so that's hardly my reason for argument.

It has always surprised me that those others who act as our government employees (presumably through their own inexperience) seem to stand back and accept the opinions of those who seem to make up the case,  as they go along!  *

 .......  It was thought that the hauliers might try and use Ipswich docks after a terrible incident at Ramsgate.  

*The shameful incident at Ramsgate was the direct responsibility of the rspca,  or was it?  For reasons that few understand,  the attending and spineless government officials allowed the rspca to bully them in to submission,  the rspca had their way,  and through a combination of ignorance and arrogance,  we had a disgraceful display of animal cruelty,  which the said charity then had the cheek to claim as a success.  Had there been one of the hauliers responsible for the appalling display of incompetence,  then they would have been prosecuted,  and with good reason.*

I have to trust that the money they receive is well spent for the good of the animals they seek to protect.  If it was proven to me that this was not the case, and that by helping them in my mown small way, I was enabling them to line their own pockets or misuse funds, then I would have to stop bsupportung them, and give my time and efforts to help one of the other many worthy charities.

*It has never been my contention that we should disband the rspca.  What's needed is a clear out of the leading and directing incompetents,  those who despite their claims,  do little to prevent animal cruelty.*

Yes, I do believe they care still following their original remit.  Hand on heart, I could not do the work of any of their inspectors...

*The individual rspca inspectors who I've met,  have generally been caring and committed people.  Often their understanding of animal welfare comes from a lecture sheet,  but they can hardly be blamed for that.*

Click to expand...

You have an open mind,  it seems,  and I'm pleased to see that you are at least open to considering the views of others,  as opposed to those who seem to have been indoctrinated with a near Mao like faith.

Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (27 June 2013)

Fellewell said:



			I expect you've seen it but there was an excellent article written by Melissa Kite in The Spectator 2/2/13 on this subject.
		
Click to expand...

I hadn't but now I have.  Thank you.  It was a well written piece,  I thought,  and by and large,  it was accurate.  I've drawn one paragraph from the article,  and enclose it below.  My leading complaint against the charity is that their bullying and dictator like leader,  seems to be having an influence which is filtering down through the system.  The principles which we once recognised and largely applauded seem to be a distant memory.

_"The real shame of it is that many RSPCA employees on the ground, in rescue centres and horse sanctuaries, do excellent work. Local branches, however, are increasingly cash-strapped and struggling to answer emergency call-outs to cases of real neglect and suffering, which are on the increase in this recession. It is striking that in 2010 the charity had reserves of £48 million, but has since complained its reserves have been eroded."_

Alec.


----------



## joeanne (27 June 2013)

Maybe someone can help me work this out?
I though that the RSPCA rehoming center's (the ones that are for the most part, depressing crumbling concrete block construction) were owned by the RSPCA.
But it appears that apparently these places operate under the name only and are entirely self funded.
So when the young chap knocks on the door and asks you to help save starving kittens (like the ones in his folder), WHERE is that money going?
Because as I understand it, its not going to my local rehoming center who treat, keep, rehabilitate and rehome the animals unfortunate enough to find themselves in it's care.


----------



## Superhot (27 June 2013)

Whilst you might be right about the incident at Ramsgate, ultimately the responsibility must lie with those who actually ship live animals (for slaughter)  If it was banned, the problem would be solved...


----------



## Alec Swan (27 June 2013)

Superhot said:



			Whilst you might be right about the incident at Ramsgate, ultimately the responsibility must lie with those who actually ship live animals (for slaughter)  If it was banned, the problem would be solved...
		
Click to expand...

I'm beginning to think that my last two posts were something of a rant,  and may have been rather _over-focused_,  I'm generally not a person who becomes obsessive about anything,  so if anyone's bored,  I apologise! 

Anyway,  in the same vein;  The question of Live Export is an emotive issue we all know,  and along with many other welfare issues,  the facts are often clouded by misrepresentations,  from _both_ sides of the argument.

The demonstrations and near riotous events of a few years ago at the docks,  were as far off the mark,  as were the miner's strikes and the government's handling of them,  previously.

You are entirely right in that the responsibility for the welfare of any shipped animal lies with the shipper,  and I'd add that the responsibility for inspection lies with the positioned and relevant government inspectors.

Ban All Live Export?  Really?  Would that also include Racehorses going off to Stud or to race,  in France?  Where is there a difference between an animal which is going to cross the Chanel to die,  and one which will presumably return?  

I'd also point out that the slaughter of dairy bull calves,  at a couple of days of age,  followed by incineration,  isn't just wasteful,  it's wrong.  Correctly carried and shipped,  they will have a worthwhile,  if relatively short,  existence.

This leads us to another point,  and that's the question of welfare.  Animals which are sourced and paid for,  here in the UK,  are going to be expensive.  Does anyone honestly think that a foreign buyer is going to risk his hard earned money,  buying a product which through loss of life,  or general decline in body condition,  is only going to be worth (say?) 70% of the purchase price when it arrives at his door? The Continental buyers aren't that stupid.

OF COURSE there have been welfare issues,  and those issues need facing up to and correcting.  There also needs to be a fit-for-purpose inspection team,  and a team which wont be bullied by those who travel animals.

The rspca wont be the only charity who've used the question of Live Exports as a chest and drum beating exercise,  and one which is seen as a nice little earner.  The claims made that animal welfare lies at the base of their actions,  is rubbish.  They know it,  and so should you! 

Lecture over!

Alec.


----------



## Superhot (27 June 2013)

Ooooh, I think I feel b......ed now.  I carefully added the words (for slaughter) in my post, as I do realise that some animals travel via ships, planes and trains, indeed, I transport dogs/cats to Heathrow for emigration myself.  My own horse was brought over from Alberta in utero (if that's the correct spelling) but inside a pregnant mare anyway

You've given me food for thought Alec and I _really will_ think on it, but for the moment I'll stick to helping getting animals out of kennels to the right homes a.s.a.p. and supporting my local branch of the RSPCA.


----------



## Aarrghimpossiblepony (29 June 2013)

Superhot said:



			I'm a home checker for them. I don't get involved in politics etc, just do my bit to help abandoned and cruelly treated animals a fresh chance in life. I do get upset when I hear stories of the RSPCA not attending situations where the animals so desperately need them.  In my local area, they are very good, and if I gave up helping them in my own small way, who would be the ones to suffer?  The animals of course, so I carry on regardless...
		
Click to expand...

Why do you check people's homes?
Overall, as animals can be bought by anybody with no checks whatsoever, how does this do more good than harm?

What are you checking for?

I could see the point if there were strict rules and licences required to buy a horse/cat/dog/goldfish. But until that point, it seems like a waste of time that puts off many people from even considering rehoming an animal from the RSPCA.


----------



## Superhot (29 June 2013)

First of all, I need to meet all family members to ensure everyone is keen to take on this animal.  I then check who will have overall daily responsibility for it, where it will sleep, fences secure and high enough, that the adopters fully understand the costs involved in owning an animal and looking after it properly. Whilst these points may sound a bit obvious or even glib, I don't go in firing questions, it's all done in a very friendly relaxed way, having a chat over a cuppa, and you can usually get a gut feel for people under these circumstances.  Bear in mind that the animal concerned has probably already had a rough start in life, so to spend a little time doing a home check to try and make sure that their next home will be a good and loving one, isn't a big ask as far as I'm concerned.
I would also add that having bred 2 litters of pups in the past, prospective owners were put through a very rigorous interview, and if I didn't think they would love my pups and give them a good home, then they didn't get one, regardless of how much money they offered!!!
I do realise that people can obtain pets from Gumtree, Free Ads and very many other rescue centres, but we live in very cruel times, and if we can try our best to make sure dogs don't end up as bait dogs etc, surely it's a good thing?  The RSPCA isn't the only animal rescue organisation who does home checks by any means.


----------



## Natch (29 June 2013)

Arghimpossiblepony surely you can see the point in wishing to ensure that rescues get placed in a suitable home  it isn't law but it is best practice to ensure that your animal is going to a suitable home,  especially so for charities who often deal with animals who have already had one sub-standard home, and who generally guarantee to take that animal back in if the home doesn't work out.


----------



## ILuvCowparsely (29 June 2013)

Moomin1 said:



			Well, maybe Alec shouldn't ask the original question then, if you are all bored of hearing from people who support the work of the RSPCA?

In any case, my opinion is mine, yours is yours.  I didn't realise you were the 
opinion police! 

And no.
		
Click to expand...

Moomin   your endless  support of the RSPCA  tells us you have never had bad dealings with them???

 rude staff
 money given by an old lady was used to buy a car and carpet back in 70's
 some fat RSPCA woman  telling me to go home and come back with b/f before they would let me see a kitten ( after queuing 1 1/2 hrs ) then me asking for a torty she said w_e havent not any_ i said but the paper said u have_, paper always comes out late go home and come back
_

 staff more interested in coffee and doing what they do best

 (drinking coffee ignoring plea for help)
 instead of help a poor horse in distress

 phone call to RSPCA  to say a cat run over but not dead , they said is the cat mistreated??? NO the cat run over Well then we are not interested.

 maybe if you actually witness this you ma y not be so quick to support


----------



## ILuvCowparsely (29 June 2013)

Aarrghimpossiblepony said:



			Why do you check people's homes?
Overall, as animals can be bought by anybody with no checks whatsoever, how does this do more good than harm?

What are you checking for?

I could see the point if there were strict rules and licences required to buy a horse/cat/dog/goldfish. But until that point, it seems like a waste of time that puts off many people from even considering rehoming an animal from the RSPCA.
		
Click to expand...

 general home checks is NOT a waste of time you have no clue what is involved and why its done.  Most Charities do home checks and follow up visits including horse welfare.

 I am not pro RSPCA BUT in fairness things need to be checked

 where the cat sleeps
the cat not left alone much
make sure they are not conning anyone
not on a busy road
where the cat box is etc
 and many more
 and there are many things to run through too 


registering with a vet &#8211; worming,
de-fleaing, feeding, microchipping
and vaccination
&#8226;
the settling in process &#8211; also see our
Essential Guide: Welcome Home
&#8226;
neutering &#8211; providing they are old
enough,
&#8226;
keeping your cat in at night &#8211;
safety first!
&#8226;
feline health matters
&#8226;
pet insurance &#8211; 

getting your cat home &#8211; eg how to
safely transport your cat in your car
&#8226;
boarding &#8211; what to do when you
go on holiday
&#8226;
&#8211; we&#8217;ll be in
touch to see how you and puss are
getting along


----------



## fburton (30 June 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			Ban All Live Export?  Really?  Would that also include Racehorses going off to Stud or to race,  in France?  Where is there a difference between an animal which is going to cross the Chanel to die,  and one which will presumably return?
		
Click to expand...

One difference might be that with an animal going for meat there isn't the same incentive to ensure they arrive happy and in full working order. Obviously one doesn't want them bashed around too much because that will mean reduced meat quality and $$$, but a bit more stress and trauma is acceptable with them compared to a racehorse going off to stud.


----------



## Wundahorse (1 July 2013)

I can only assume Grant was recruited on the basis of the contents of his CV,then the interview in which he must have outlined his vision for the future of the RSPCA.I have no idea about the politics of the charity,not being privy to any of this,but i worry Grant was selected for his political ideas,which have resulted in much needed funds being diverted to support political aims,not animal welfare.I fear the RSPCA started losing it's way some time ago.


----------



## Aarrghimpossiblepony (2 July 2013)

Leviathan said:



			general home checks is NOT a waste of time you have no clue what is involved and why its done.  Most Charities do home checks and follow up visits including horse welfare.

 I am not pro RSPCA BUT in fairness things need to be checked

*where the cat sleeps*
*the cat not left alone much*
make sure they are not conning anyone
*not on a busy road*
*where the cat box is etc*
 and many more
 and there are many things to run through too 


registering with a vet  worming,
de-fleaing, feeding, microchipping
and vaccination

*the settling in process*  also see our
Essential Guide: Welcome Home

neutering  providing they are old
enough,

*keeping your cat in at night* 
safety first!

feline health matters

*pet insurance*  

*getting your cat home  eg how to
safely transport your cat in your ca*r

*boarding  what to do when you
go on holiday*

 well be in
touch to see how you and puss are
getting along
		
Click to expand...

All the BIB are not accepted by many people as at all necessary.

So instead they go out and buy a cat/dog.

So how does that cut down on breeding or give animals that need rehoming a home?

Where the cat sleeps?????


----------

