# RSPCA local branch to close due to lack of funds.



## Luci07 (4 January 2013)

As reported in the Daily  Telegraph. At its most simplistic, I just do not understand this. The branch is expected to raise donations locally and by itself. Where does the money given to the overall charity go then? We all know about the recent court expenditure against the Heythrop, which I feel is going to be incredibly costly for them in terms of public perception.. but seriously, if you donate to the RSPCA, where does the money go if not back into the local branches which ARE trying to do something?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...6k-prosecuting-David-Camerons-local-hunt.html


----------



## joeanne (4 January 2013)

That is because the RSPCA do not fund rescue centres. They are entirely self funded.
So what exactly DOES the money they collect go on.....oh yes......prosecuting hunts and old people....


----------



## carthorse (4 January 2013)

This is the same as RDA. I used to manage a centre and we had to raise every penny. I have no idea what some of these charities do with their money accept pay their office staff.


----------



## Welly (4 January 2013)

I never knew this.  So what you are telling me is that if there is a person with a tin outside my supermarket the money goes to the local centre they are from. So where does the money from the very expensive advert that is on TV go!


----------



## foolsgold (4 January 2013)

The RSPCA does fund some shelters. If they are called "the whatever branch of the RSPCA" then they are self-funding branches, usually staffed by volunteers and sometimes without an actual centre as the animals are fostered out. If they are called "whatever animal centre" then it is funded by and under the control of the RSPCA. Animal centres are usually where the case animals are sent for the duration of the case/rehabilitation, and branches tend to deal with unwanted pets for rehoming. Branches get to use the name for fundraising but do not have to follow the same guidelines and policies that the centres do.


----------



## competitiondiva (4 January 2013)

Foolsgold has pretty much summed it up there. If you donate to the national RSPCA you help to find inspectors attending your calls about situations requiring intervention. It also pays for emergency veterinary care of stray animals, the boarding of case animals and veterinary care of these. Take for instance the pony found over Christmas called 'elf' in my other thread. The international work of the RSPCA, ie the work they did in Haiti in the earth quake. Educational issues, research, prosecutions, (and whether you agree with the heythropp prosecution, when the cps decline to take a case where the defendants were clearly guilty, thank God the rspca were prepared to pay for it! Or should the rich get away with what they want to do, despite what the law says?) The local branch tend to deal with ongoing care, boarding, vets bills of stray animals, refining of these animals, animals unwanted by the public, aid in paying vet bills for those who can't afford them etc


----------



## competitiondiva (4 January 2013)

Fund, not find!


----------



## competitiondiva (4 January 2013)

Re homing not refining! Dam this predictive text!


----------



## Luci07 (4 January 2013)

I will not agree with the RSPCA funding the court cases. It is not a question of the rich getting away with it - they were prosecuting hunt staff who are certainly not earning a lot of money. Neither did the hunt have the funds to take on the RSPCA. But this is moving away from the main point. However you look at this, a branch which actually is doing what we all think the RSPCA is facing closure. Its high time the RSPCA became more transparent about where the money goes (public donations after all) and focuses on animal welfare. I have absolutely no time for wasting money the way they do when everyday I see yet more healthy young dogs being PTS. Why doesn't the RSPCA do more of what Battersea is trying to do and educate the public?


----------



## happyhunter123 (4 January 2013)

Luci07 said:



			I will not agree with the RSPCA funding the court cases. It is not a question of the rich getting away with it - they were prosecuting hunt staff who are certainly not earning a lot of money. Neither did the hunt have the funds to take on the RSPCA.
		
Click to expand...

Whatever your view on hunting, it is undeniable that the RSPCA wasted money on this case-money that could have been used to protect places like this. 
The LACS (perfectly experienced and occasionally successful) should have prosecuted the Heythrop, not the RSPCA. Massive waste of funds.


----------



## Echo Bravo (4 January 2013)

So know we know the RSPCA is a 2 tier system, the branches that are trying to do something and the top nobs are into what I call class warfare, what they never seem to realise that most people that go hunting are from all walks of life.


----------



## Sussexbythesea (4 January 2013)

happyhunter123 said:



			Whatever your view on hunting, it is undeniable that the RSPCA wasted money on this case-money that could have been used to protect places like this. 
The LACS (perfectly experienced and occasionally successful) should have prosecuted the Heythrop, not the RSPCA. Massive waste of funds.
		
Click to expand...

If they didn't break the law nobody would have to "waste" money on prosecuting them.


----------



## Echo Bravo (4 January 2013)

And to spend peoples donations prosecuting a legal hunt is ok b*gger the poor animals that really need help. Good one Sussex!!!


----------



## Alec Swan (4 January 2013)

happyhunter123 said:



			.......

The LACS (perfectly experienced and occasionally successful) should have prosecuted the Heythrop, not the RSPCA. Massive waste of funds.
		
Click to expand...

Justifying a prosecution against the Heythrop,  and considering the LACS owned Baronsdown Wood,  debacle,  may just have raised an eyebrow,  or two!  Even the lacs aren't that lax,  surely! 

Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (4 January 2013)

joeanne said:



			That is because the RSPCA do not fund rescue centres. They are entirely self funded.
So what exactly DOES the money they collect go on.....oh yes......prosecuting hunts and old people....
		
Click to expand...

Don't forget £6mil on a brand new centre,  but that was only achieved with a serious set of cost cutting redundancies. 

Alec.


----------



## Echo Bravo (4 January 2013)

Alec the sensible.


----------



## competitiondiva (4 January 2013)

Echo bravo, the point is the hunt were not 'a legal hunt' that is the point!!!! They were hunting illegally!!!!!!!!


----------



## competitiondiva (4 January 2013)

......


----------



## MerrySherryRider (4 January 2013)

Perhaps those that think the RSPCA shouldn't prosecute animal abusers think these horses should still be with Sally Rix ?http://www.worldhorsewelfare.org/information/latest-news?view=show&content_id=5395

If the hunts and other abusers didn't break the law, perhaps the RSPCA could concentrate funds elsewhere. Or should they only prosecute working class people? 

Of course, our dear friend Julian  does have a bank account ready for your donations if you feel strongly about his victimisation and don't want him to have to lower the heating at his lovely Chipping Norton farmhouse.


----------



## joeanne (4 January 2013)

The RSPCA USED to promote better standards of care, and HELP those struggling with education and funding for vets etc.
Now these same people are prosecuted, and the animals removed at a far higher cost to both the RSPCA and the animals (who are removed, kenneled, PTS......).
Perhaps if they went back to "grass roots" I would have a bit more respect, but the whole time they are sitting in newly built and decorated offices and the animals they profess to help are sitting in leaking, shabby kennels, I shall leave my hard earnt money in the bank.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (4 January 2013)

joeanne said:



			The RSPCA USED to promote better standards of care, and HELP those struggling with education and funding for vets etc.
Now these same people are prosecuted, and the animals removed at a far higher cost to both the RSPCA and the animals (who are removed, kenneled, PTS......).
Perhaps if they went back to "grass roots" I would have a bit more respect, but the whole time they are sitting in newly built and decorated offices and the animals they profess to help are sitting in leaking, shabby kennels, I shall leave my hard earnt money in the bank.
		
Click to expand...


I'm slightly surprised at your post, seeing your link for the Cairo farrier, I'd have thought you'd be full of support for the RSPCA's international work. Running, alonside other welfare charities, successful animal anti rabies, birth control and education programmes in Africa, Eastern Europe, Asia etc.
 Not to mention the programmes to help prevent authorities poisoning  and shooting stray dogs, or  euthansia by car exhaust pipe.

But for those of those outraged by the RSPCA's successful prosecutions of lawbreakers, don't worry about all the work the RSPCA do that doesn't make the Daily Mail.


----------



## Moomin1 (4 January 2013)

horserider said:



			I'm slightly surprised at your post, seeing your link for the Cairo farrier, I'd have thought you'd be full of support for the RSPCA's international work. Running, alonside other welfare charities, successful animal anti rabies, birth control and education programmes in Africa, Eastern Europe, Asia etc.
 Not to mention the programmes to help prevent authorities poisoning  and shooting stray dogs, or  euthansia by car exhaust pipe.

But for those of those outraged by the RSPCA's successful prosecutions of lawbreakers, don't worry about all the work the RSPCA do that doesn't make the Daily Mail.
		
Click to expand...

Horserider, some people are just too blinkered and small minded to even use their brains and realise that the majority of the day to day prosecutions taking place will simply never reach the press because they either aren't controversial enough, or they aren't high profile.  

It always makes me laugh the way anti-RSPCA vehemently argue that the RSPCA only take high profile cases!    It doesn't for one second occur to them that those cases reach the papers because they ARE high profile!


----------



## Welly (5 January 2013)

If the police and CPS took the view not to prosecute I can only think they thought that they might not win the case, and with a finite amount of resources they decided not to prosecute. The RSPCA also have a finite amount of money and have to decide how to spend it. The amount of money spent on this one case would have gone a long way to keeping this place going. If they want my money they need to look at how they spend theirs! (or look at spending their money more wisely)


----------



## competitiondiva (5 January 2013)

I agree welly, so the result would be those who are guilty who can afford an expensive defensive solicitor etc get away with sticking two fingers up to the law and no one holds them accountable? I'm personally thankful someone was there to make sure that didn't happen. It's just a pity that someone ended up having to be a charity!! No not the way I would like donations spent, but then if the people who chose to abuse animals didn't. Then they wouldn't have to 'waste' their money bringing them to justice.


----------



## Alec Swan (5 January 2013)

competitiondiva said:



			I agree welly, so the result would be those who are guilty who can afford an expensive defensive solicitor etc get away with sticking two fingers up to the law and no one holds them accountable? 

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

The answer to your inaccurate statement is that Legal Aid is in place for those who can't afford their own defence.  

The difference between reality and your thoughts is that those who can afford their own defence might also risk being responsible for the prosecution costs,  so when the CPS decline to press ahead,  the reality is that they have a week case.  

The Law and the Courts deal with all in a level headed manner,  and the reality is that those without the funds to pay for their own defence are more often the ones to raise two fingers.

Alec.


----------



## Luci07 (5 January 2013)

I put my hands up and say I am hunt supporter but I am really incredibly uninterested in this endless debate at this time.  The point is that I very very strongly disagree with how the RSPCA chooses to spend public donations, but maybe that is because I keep seeing the endless lists of dogs in pounds on the PTS list who need help. If the RSPCA wish to lobby and take a legal stance, how about focusing on the backstreet breeders who churn out poor quality animals, sell them cheaply and leave someone else (volunteers) to sort out their mess.. if they can.

And if the RSPCA felt that they completely correct in  taking the stance about prosecutions.. who come this is not mentioned in all the advertising we see? All we see if the RSPCA rescuing a badly abused animal, not in court over fox hunting. 

And for the RSPCA supporters on here.. there was a good question raised earlier, so if someone is jangling a tin for money.. is there an easy way to know where the  money goes?

I want the RSPCA to go back to what it used to be, yes it didn't always get it right but it tried and was a voice for all animals. The bad press is growing (not just the Daily Mail) and unless someone radically overhauls perception, openness and activity, this will be a charity in pretty poor shape. In fact, if Preston is anything to go by, then it is already happening.


----------



## competitiondiva (5 January 2013)

Point taken I_shot_Santa but the case was not weak and they were found guilty..... So why did the cps leave a charity to pay for the prosecution? Wrong IMO...


----------



## Simsar (5 January 2013)

They were not ''found guilty'' they pleaded guilty because of the cost of defending themselves, and cost is something the RSPCA should have thought about when bringing the convictions, this is the exact reason that whenever I do give to charity I am selective and choose one which I KNOW where and what it will be spent on, or just donate my time!


----------



## Alec Swan (5 January 2013)

Simsar,

the worrying point is,  that when the rspca sink themselves into debt,  and when they issue pleas for further funds,  from an adoring public,  then the deeper the debt so the greater the response.  Do we dive into a river and save a man who isn't drowning?  

I'm sure that I'm not alone in assuring others that were the rspca to stick to their original tenet,  then they would receive my total support.  We need a Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals,  but in its current format,  it's a joke,  and a failure,  and those who direct the necessary fund raising are those who steer the policy makers.  The rspca has nothing to do with animal cruelty and everything to do with those who have their feet firmly implanted in a trough.

Alec.


----------



## ILuvCowparsely (5 January 2013)

there are so many charities i wont send money to 

RSPCA is one and  Guide dogs for the blind is another.

 In fact only a handful I will support.

 The RSPCA have got a bad name for themselves now which is why a lot don't send money in to them.


----------



## Echo Bravo (5 January 2013)

Why has the RSPCA singled out the hunt people they when you look at it are very few and killed very few foxes over many years, when we all realise that many animals of all types are being ill/badly treated each week, so why have they wasted so much good money on 1 Hunt. Me personally would like the hunt back as there are so many foxes with mange round here and it's horrible to see them so thin,no hair and skin and bone and all they do it sit and scratch themselves raw and these are last years cubs.


----------



## joeanne (6 January 2013)

Moomince Pie said:



			Horserider, some people are just too blinkered and small minded to even use their brains and realise that the majority of the day to day prosecutions taking place will simply never reach the press because they either aren't controversial enough, or they aren't high profile.  

It always makes me laugh the way anti-RSPCA vehemently argue that the RSPCA only take high profile cases!    It doesn't for one second occur to them that those cases reach the papers because they ARE high profile!
		
Click to expand...


Not blinkered at all Moomin.....in fact I would say YOUR job makes YOU blinkered to the faults that lay within YOUR employers organisation.
Cairo Farrier spend EVERY penny on the welfare of the horses and ponies in need of care. They fund the training of farriers to continue the good work.
Same applies to EMW, and PFK.
They are WORTHY charities/organisations that slog day and night to ensure the animals they care for GET the care they need.
Hense why they get my support and my money


----------



## MurphysMinder (6 January 2013)

A very good article in the Telegraph today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/co...s-being-destroyed-by-a-militant-tendency.html


----------



## Alec Swan (6 January 2013)

An interesting post M_M,  though if we are to apply any justice to the article offered,  we have to consider that it is the opinion of a journalist,  which has been laced with fact.

One paragraph caught my eye;  and whether Richard Ryder actually holds the view which I've quoted below,  or whether the writer has put his own slant on the argument,  isn't too clear.  I'd like to know the answer,  because if Ryder actually believes and supports the quote,  then the man is living in a dream world.  To suggest that animals and humans share the same moral standing,  is complete and utter rubbish.  To consider that animals act in an ethical,  or even a charitable manner,  is quite wrong.  They don't.  With the odd possible exception,  from the very odd possible animal,  then animals don't have the power to reason or to use logic,  and as such they don't have the one quality (sic!) that humans portray,  and which separates us from the animal kingdom,  which is intelligence.

_"The doctrine of animal rights, developed by Dr Richard Ryder, who is on the RSPCA Council, regards human beings as morally identical to other animals, 
......."._

If Ryder actually agrees with and supports the above quote,  then he's wrong.  Very wrong.

Alec.


----------



## competitiondiva (6 January 2013)

My question... If someone is keeping an animal in a way in which is likely to cause suffering, and despite advice, assistance, aid offered, refuses to alter the way in which it is kept, and baring in mind, due to the 'mild severity' of the offence of hunting in comparison to the costs involved in bringing it, the cps rejected taking the case. Who then should take the afore mentioned case in order to improve that animals life??? Whilst the rspca 's decisions to some may be questionable, until anyone else is willing to take the costs of a prosecution on, we have to support the only one that will..... Also bare in mind that the RSPCA's prosecution success rate is around 98%, a figure the cps aren't anywhere near.....


----------



## Paddydou (8 January 2013)

Simsar said:



			They were not ''found guilty'' they pleaded guilty because of the cost of defending themselves, and cost is something the RSPCA should have thought about when bringing the convictions, this is the exact reason that whenever I do give to charity I am selective and choose one which I KNOW where and what it will be spent on, or just donate my time!
		
Click to expand...

This is so common these days not just in the hunting world. There are many out there who can not afford to defend themselves. 

Justice is blind and often there are not enough pound signs to be able to remove her blindfold.

I am not in favour of the RSPCA. I had a friend many years ago who's home bred horse was very sick. It was under veternary care and they were reported to the RSPCA by a concerned member of the public. Despite everything being done for the horse and the horse recovering they still tried to take it away! WHY??? The horse was being very well looked after by the owner, the vet reported that had it not recieved the attention and care supplied by the owner it would have died. The vet reported that they could not have been called out sooner as the horse did not show any symptoms and as it was they were just called because the horse started looking a bit off colour and wasn't quite themselves but no obvious signs of anything wrong just a gut feeling... 

Since then and after seeing how hard my friend worked for her horse and the added distress caused by the RSPCA and their tactics I have been very anti them. They really do seem to have lost their way and in many cases are just going about getting peoples backs up rather than doing the animals any good.


----------



## Crugeran Celt (9 January 2013)

competitiondiva said:



			Foolsgold has pretty much summed it up there. If you donate to the national RSPCA you help to find inspectors attending your calls about situations requiring intervention. It also pays for emergency veterinary care of stray animals.

Not sure about that, a friend of mine found a staffie in a terrible state. She thought it was already dead when she picked it up. She drove to the local RSPCA centre which she visited regurlarly giving them tins of feed and money, they refused to take the dog and told her to take it to the police!! She did take it to the police who also refused to take it as it was 'not causing a problem'. They even suggested she put it back on the street as then they would be called to pick it up as it would be an obstuction to traffic!! In the end she took it to Many Tears who took it in and managed to get it rehomed eventually after a lot of medical intervention.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Honeylight (15 January 2013)

My cat died at the weekend, he had been diagnosed with a serious heart complaint about a year ago & did well with a good quality of life up to then. Last night I tentatively looked at cat re-homing centres in my area including the RSPCA site. What I read about their terms & conditions (for cats didn't look at dogs) may explain why they have so many animals backed up in the system.
You have to have a home visit & obviously meet a pretty tough critera but as well as that they want to do spot checks yearly. The thing that worried me the most & means that I will not be going to them to get another cat is you have to sign something to say that if you can't keep the cat in the future due to changes in your health or circumstances you have to give it back to them. Personally I would rather pass it on to a relation or trusted friend given their record in putting healthy animals to sleep. It seems it will never truly your cat.


----------



## competitiondiva (15 January 2013)

Honeylight said:



			My cat died at the weekend, he had been diagnosed with a serious heart complaint about a year ago & did well with a good quality of life up to then. Last night I tentatively looked at cat re-homing centres in my area including the RSPCA site. What I read about their terms & conditions (for cats didn't look at dogs) may explain why they have so many animals backed up in the system.
You have to have a home visit & obviously meet a pretty tough critera but as well as that they want to do spot checks yearly. The thing that worried me the most & means that I will not be going to them to get another cat is you have to sign something to say that if you can't keep the cat in the future due to changes in your health or circumstances you have to give it back to them. Personally I would rather pass it on to a relation or trusted friend given their record in putting healthy animals to sleep. It seems it will never truly your cat.
		
Click to expand...

You will find this with ALL rescues, to prevent the animals being 'sold' on and being passed from piller to post.  At the end of the day you are adopting the animal, not buying it.


----------



## competitiondiva (15 January 2013)

Crugeran Celt said:





competitiondiva said:



			Foolsgold has pretty much summed it up there. If you donate to the national RSPCA you help to find inspectors attending your calls about situations requiring intervention. It also pays for emergency veterinary care of stray animals.

Not sure about that, a friend of mine found a staffie in a terrible state. She thought it was already dead when she picked it up. She drove to the local RSPCA centre which she visited regurlarly giving them tins of feed and money, they refused to take the dog and told her to take it to the police!! She did take it to the police who also refused to take it as it was 'not causing a problem'. They even suggested she put it back on the street as then they would be called to pick it up as it would be an obstuction to traffic!! In the end she took it to Many Tears who took it in and managed to get it rehomed eventually after a lot of medical intervention.
		
Click to expand...

If this dog was in truth collapsed and near death (would assume this as she thought it was already dead) then both the rspca centre and police's reaction should have been to immediately ask your friend to take it to a vet.  No matter what time of day.  If both places didn't give this reaction, then I'd expect the dog wasn't in as dire need of veterinary care and therefore would fall under your local councils remit for stray dogs.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Luci07 (15 January 2013)

Unfortunately and I really do quote from first hand experience and I DO know that each branch has different criteria, but we have found that the RSPCA are, shall we say, not so staffie friendly and have been known to take one dog and leave the stafford behind.


----------



## Serenity087 (15 January 2013)

Question.

Is there a way I can find out if my local RSPCA centre is locally funded or nationally funded?

If it's local then I shall ignore the name on the tin and spend some more time and money helping them out.

I have no doubt that grassroutes animal helpers at places like the RSPCA are honest and are doing their best for the animals.  They may be a little strange (We had major issues with a weirdo at one well known horse charity, and I worked with a couple at a wildlife charity!) but they're doing the right thing.

This way I can ensure I'm not spending money on needless prosecutions and publicity stunts and can help animals


----------



## Luci07 (15 January 2013)

Serenity087 said:



			Question.

Is there a way I can find out if my local RSPCA centre is locally funded or nationally funded?

If it's local then I shall ignore the name on the tin and spend some more time and money helping them out.

I have no doubt that grassroutes animal helpers at places like the RSPCA are honest and are doing their best for the animals.  They may be a little strange (We had major issues with a weirdo at one well known horse charity, and I worked with a couple at a wildlife charity!) but they're doing the right thing.

This way I can ensure I'm not spending money on needless prosecutions and publicity stunts and can help animals 

Click to expand...

From what has been previously posted, it would appear that all the branches are self funded but to take into consideration that each branch has its own criteria and rules. If you want to help out animal rescue and really know what is going on, perhaps ask on here for recommended local ones who need help? I know they all need help but some might be a better option than others!


----------



## Moomin1 (15 January 2013)

Serenity087 said:



			Question.

Is there a way I can find out if my local RSPCA centre is locally funded or nationally funded?

If it's local then I shall ignore the name on the tin and spend some more time and money helping them out.

I have no doubt that grassroutes animal helpers at places like the RSPCA are honest and are doing their best for the animals.  They may be a little strange (We had major issues with a weirdo at one well known horse charity, and I worked with a couple at a wildlife charity!) but they're doing the right thing.

This way I can ensure I'm not spending money on needless prosecutions and publicity stunts and can help animals 

Click to expand...

Out of interest, do you feel that all prosecutions are needless?


----------



## competitiondiva (15 January 2013)

Luci07 what serenity has asked is not what other rescues there are but whether their local shelter is nationally funded or not. There are only about 4 nationally funded I believe, and they are big shelters. Which might give you an idea whether it is or not. Otherwise pop in and ask. Whether you want to support neglect case animals, or just help with the animals at your local centre. Both imo are deserving causes and both need support to continue. So if your feeling is that you don't like the national rspca, don't let that stop you helping your local branch who also need help desperately to cope with the excess of animals we have in the UK.


----------



## Dobiegirl (15 January 2013)

Honeylight said:



			My cat died at the weekend, he had been diagnosed with a serious heart complaint about a year ago & did well with a good quality of life up to then. Last night I tentatively looked at cat re-homing centres in my area including the RSPCA site. What I read about their terms & conditions (for cats didn't look at dogs) may explain why they have so many animals backed up in the system.
You have to have a home visit & obviously meet a pretty tough critera but as well as that they want to do spot checks yearly. The thing that worried me the most & means that I will not be going to them to get another cat is you have to sign something to say that if you can't keep the cat in the future due to changes in your health or circumstances you have to give it back to them. Personally I would rather pass it on to a relation or trusted friend given their record in putting healthy animals to sleep. It seems it will never truly your cat.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.gumtree.com/p/pets/snoop...-and-neutered/113556734#.UPUuMo9dS0g.facebook


----------



## competitiondiva (15 January 2013)

Ok maybe not 5!!! http://m.politics.co.uk/opinion-for...ety-for-the-prevention-of-cruelty-to-animals/ some interesting facts.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (15 January 2013)

Honeylight said:



			My cat died at the weekend, he had been diagnosed with a serious heart complaint about a year ago & did well with a good quality of life up to then. Last night I tentatively looked at cat re-homing centres in my area including the RSPCA site. What I read about their terms & conditions (for cats didn't look at dogs) may explain why they have so many animals backed up in the system.
You have to have a home visit & obviously meet a pretty tough critera but as well as that they want to do spot checks yearly. The thing that worried me the most & means that I will not be going to them to get another cat is you have to sign something to say that if you can't keep the cat in the future due to changes in your health or circumstances you have to give it back to them. Personally I would rather pass it on to a relation or trusted friend given their record in putting healthy animals to sleep. It seems it will never truly your cat.
		
Click to expand...

I don't see a problem with this policy, its very responsible. Surely, its better that they check the home rather than letting it go anywhere ? I had RSPCA home checks for dogs I've rehomed, and the inspectors were really nice and down to earth. Couple of friends have had cats, again, without difficulty, after having home checks.
 I think most good rescues are the same and will request that animals are sent back to them if the person can no longer keep them.


----------



## Serenity087 (15 January 2013)

Moomin1 said:



			Out of interest, do you feel that all prosecutions are needless?
		
Click to expand...

No, but I do feel they're barking up the wrong tree with some of them.

They seem to prosecute people who can't defend themselves rather than people who actually need a slap on the wrist.

Like the jackass who killed 41 sheep at Ramsgate by ordering the lorry be unloaded there and then despite the lack of facilities for it.

Oh wait... he worked for the RSPCA... he gets away with it!


----------



## Moomin1 (15 January 2013)

Serenity087 said:



			No, but I do feel they're barking up the wrong tree with some of them.

They seem to prosecute people who can't defend themselves rather than people who actually need a slap on the wrist.

Like the jackass who killed 41 sheep at Ramsgate by ordering the lorry be unloaded there and then despite the lack of facilities for it.

Oh wait... he worked for the RSPCA... he gets away with it!
		
Click to expand...

Well the DEFRA vets must have been jackasses too then!  

https://www.rspca.org.uk/utilities/statement/0113_5


----------



## competitiondiva (15 January 2013)

Dobiegirl, if they have notified the RSPCA shelter she was from. I fully expect the arrangement is, 'we are full and cannot accept her in right now, if you can find a home we would be happy to home check it to meet our criteria and if passed, have the cat adopted with them.


----------



## Dobiegirl (15 January 2013)

competitiondiva said:



			Dobiegirl, if they have notified the RSPCA shelter she was from. I fully expect the arrangement is, 'we are full and cannot accept her in right now, if you can find a home we would be happy to home check it to meet our criteria and if passed, have the cat adopted with them.
		
Click to expand...

You are assumming this is the case but you dont know and neither do I but the fact she is advertising on Gumtree hardly inspires confidence. I would have thought and hoped if they were full they would have offered to put the cat on their site which is what most rescues do to safeguard the animal.


----------



## MillyMoomie (15 January 2013)

It saddens me to see that so many people take notice of articles written by, lets face it a newspaper that in its history; has been accused of warmongering, was friends with Adolf Hitler and a supporter of the fascists party. Perhaps instead of pointing fingers and quoting hearsay some of you should volunteer to dog walk one of the millions at a Center for an hour a week, (all those animals the RSPCA destroys remember) oh and all those staffs they don't take lucie07. Or ask to spend a day with an Inspector and get first hand experience of seeing the animals behind closed doors maybe then people will be qualified to judge. 
I'm sure the RSPCA welcomes an investigation, which the charity commission could do at any time. Or people could just look online at the accounts and reports that HAVE to be open and accessible. Perhaps people could remember that the RSPCA don't just "take" animals, they are either signed over legally or seized by the police only on the advice of a vet in accordance with the law. Which the RSPCA then take responsibility for including paying the bills. Wouldn't it be nice for the RSPCA to have a few spare kennels or stables free instead of paying thousands of pounds in private boarding every week? And before you ask I am country girl, who has enjoyed hunting in the past and thinks drag hunting is a fabulous alternative to the tradition of chasing an animal around the countryside. It was also a tradition to burn witches. A suggestion would be to stop reading the vile tabloids and get some perspective.


----------



## competitiondiva (15 January 2013)

Here here milliemoomie. X


----------



## Alec Swan (15 January 2013)

MillyMoomie said:



			.......

.. And before you ask I am country girl, who has enjoyed hunting in the past and thinks drag hunting is a fabulous alternative to the tradition of chasing an animal around the countryside. ....... A suggestion would be to stop reading the vile tabloids and get some perspective.
		
Click to expand...

So you've previously _enjoyed_ hunting,  but now you don't.  Explain to us what aspect actually brought you enjoyment in the first place,  and explain to us just how you reached your road to Damascus. 

Alec.


----------



## Moomin1 (15 January 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			So you've previously _enjoyed_ hunting,  but now you don't.  Explain to us what aspect actually brought you enjoyment in the first place,  and explain to us just how you reached your road to Damascus. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

It's called having a change of heart Alec!  I used to hate sprouts.  I now like them.  I used to love liver and onions, it now turns my stomach.


----------



## MillyMoomie (15 January 2013)

"Road to Damascus" now now Alec no need to be patronising, it's not gentlemanly.
I enjoy jumping across country on a good horse with friends. I see no issue with legal hunting or why things should now change.


----------



## Alec Swan (15 January 2013)

Moomin1 said:



			It's called having a change of heart Alec!  I used to hate sprouts.  I now like them.  I used to love liver and onions, it now turns my stomach.

Click to expand...




Alec Swan said:



			So you've previously _enjoyed_ hunting,  but now you don't.  Explain to us what aspect actually brought you enjoyment in the first place,  and explain to us just how you reached your road to Damascus. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

The question was,  "Explain to us what aspect actually brought you enjoyment in the first place".  I'm assuming now that you and MillyMoomie are one and the same person,  and so I also wonder how you previously enjoyed watching animals being tortured and torn asunder,  but then,  all of a sudden,  you didn't.  A strange stance of yours.

Alec.


----------



## MillyMoomie (15 January 2013)

I can assure you MooMin1 and I are not the same person.
 A similar user name though I grant you!
Previously enjoyed watching animals being tortured are your words not mine. Please see my above reply to your question.


----------



## PipPups (18 January 2013)

£300,000 to prosecute a hunt for a technical offence, not actually an act of cruelty - seems very odd to me when the Society is under such pressure elsewhere.

A petition to get the Society back on track and away from animal rights inspired prosecutions is now quietly gathering momentum at: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/43807


----------



## Moomin1 (18 January 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			The question was,  "Explain to us what aspect actually brought you enjoyment in the first place".  I'm assuming now that you and MillyMoomie are one and the same person,  and so I also wonder how you previously enjoyed watching animals being tortured and torn asunder,  but then,  all of a sudden,  you didn't.  A strange stance of yours.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Wouldn't you just love that so much Alec?! 

Ha ha, I'm afraid I wouldn't be so sad as to create another user name to support my views.  I am sure you are aware that I am quite comfortable posting my feelings very openly on this forum.  Not only about my feelings about the RSPCA, but also I have posted about my very own battle with severe depression and anxiety.  

I have PM'd Milliemoomie to express that I am concerned people will get confused by us. I have never, and would never take any interest in fox hunting whatsoever.


----------



## Luci07 (18 January 2013)

Luci07 what serenity has asked is not what other rescues there are but whether their local shelter is nationally funded or not. There are only about 4 nationally funded I believe, and they are big shelters. Which might give you an idea whether it is or not. Otherwise pop in and ask. Whether you want to support neglect case animals, or just help with the animals at your local centre. Both imo are deserving causes and both need support to continue. So if your feeling is that you don't like the national rspca, don't let that stop you helping your local branch who also need help desperately to cope with the excess of animals we have in the UK.

I am not a fan and as I have said before, I have had first hand experience of how some branches deal with staffords. I do help charity but I have chosen where I put my efforts - I support Stafford Welfare and Guildford Staffie Rescue which means me supporting them on the stands to raise money, hassling people to buy tickets at Crufts and spreading the word for at risk Staffords. Also offered to foster while  I am job hunting though I may well fail the criteria as I do have 3 of my own. When I give my time, which like everyone else, free time is precious, I want to know that the money I raise goes directly to supporting the dogs and thats what my chosen charities do.


----------

