# R.S.P.C.A......Why so harsh on them?



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Now i now this could potenially be a controversial thread but i will hope for decent opinions. Not full on arguments. But to be honest i am fairy peeved at all the hatred towards them...........


I do understand some people's ideas about them, i will admit, certain things i do not agree with. Still don't. (as i have said before)

But seriously, 'we' as a pet forum....bearing in mind we are supposed to care about all animal welfare...should also be applauding the majority of their work.

Ok i know some things they do aren't what us animals lovers class as ''welfare respect'' but to be fair they do plenty. Think about this.....what if there was never an R.S.P.C.A??? Where would animal welfare be nowadays?

They have done so so much for animal welfare and it seems some people forget this. All are to quick to slant them but in my eyes what they have done for 1000000's animals should be admired. 

They have their means.......i.e. they have to refuse some animals due to over population in the UK and their shelters....does this make them bad? No. It makes the bad breeders even worse...if that was ever possible. Would some people rather that stranger dogs/cats be put together to ''fight it out over territory'' ?? Remembering the territories aren't big. 

Some animals are PTS, i for one hate this 'practice' with a passion (agian, i have said before)....but can you also see this as anything but realilty? The shelters are full UK wide....some very sick animals, some very healthy.....more people breeding not selling the pups, or managing to and for the pups/dogs only to find themselves at the R.S.P.C.A.

The R.S.P.C.A at least offer them a chance.............can you imagine what these dogs/pups would go through without the R.S.P.C.A???

Look back over the years and research.......and find out what animal welfare would have been without them.

A lot have you seem to have a hatred for them.....answer this? What would we have done without them sometimes?? Not just now....but years before us? 

As i have stated. I hate the fact they put animals to sleep but you'll be surprised just how many shelters/rescues do..........i 1000000% disagree with this practice, but in todays pf&byb's quick buck idea it is rife.

But for just 1 minute think..................

P.S After reading all that....remember most of the people who work there are 110% dedicated to animals welfare. Just like the majority of us on here.......

I love this forum but there are certain things on here that completely baffle me.........

As with all animal shelters/rescues they are not rich with endless cash to create many more centres for the poor unwanted animals of this society......but sometimes do the best they can. Yet many on here only have very very harsh words to say........


----------



## HighPr00 (Aug 9, 2009)

I guess you've never had to ring them and ask for help regards an act of cruelty or neglect?


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

HighPr00 said:


> I guess you've never had to ring them and ask for help regards an act of cruelty or neglect?


No i haven't......not in the UK. I also understand they fail in some of those too. But i am looking at it as a whole.


----------



## Miss.PuddyCat (Jul 13, 2009)

Ive never had to deal with the R.S.P.C.A. or animal pound/shelter so I can really say anything about them. Well I did deal with them about Tidbit but I told them no when they said they could pick her up.

My one aunt adopt all her animals minus the turtle from a shelter (4 cats,1 lab cross). We eventually got 2 cats out of the four when she passed away, my gran got one, and a friend got the dog and a cat.

I have an Aunt who does cat rescue of feral and abandon or cats given to them. I no longer speak to that side of the family so have no idea about how they work it.

I did recue my cats but not thro people. I would also privatly rehome a future dog/cat/other animal.


----------



## PoisonGirl (Oct 24, 2008)

If you lived in this country, you would understand.

I never give any money to the S/RSPCA because I don't feel it gets used appropriately.

I have seen a dog die because they sspca were useless  He was a cross breed, belonging to some junkies. he was soo skinny you could see his hips sticking out. He was so scared of people, and so depressed. But all they said was ''he has food, water and shelter, all we can do is advise the owners'' He died a few weeks later of a brain haemmorage when they beat him up again. 

I nursed a dog back to health, one that they were going to pts on the spot because it was so bad, and because they didn't think it had much chance, had given up. Funnily enough that dog is now living a happy life with a new family no thanks to them!

I have called them about things they file it and don't even bother going to see them.

They are useless.

And also, a while ago the rspca were all over the media because they had been campaining for money in scotland, sending leaflets through doors etc, but they refuse to do anything in scotland!


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

I agree, the RSPCA/SSPCA are judged harshly.

They have to work within the law, they can't just take peoples animals off them. There has to be a clear picture of neglect. I can understand members frustration, but we do not live in the a perfect world, and the RSPCA is not perfect!

The OP made a brilliant point.... Is this an animal forum? Should we not be supportive of the RSPCA/SSPCA? They do great work MOST of the time.

Just to let you all know, the SSPCA/RSPCA have applied through parliament for more powers to deal with animal cruelty an dthat is ongoing right now! Their hands are tied alot of the time by laws, which is why they are lobbying through parliament for more powers!!!! Contact the government and give them your support to the RSPCA for the changes, if you want things to change. 

I do wish members could see the bigger picture...... Could you cope on a daily basis what RSPCA inspectors have to deal with? Many go home crying at the end of the day! They are in it for the love of the animals. How do you think they feel when they see discussions like this?


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

PoisonGirl said:


> If you lived in this country, you would understand.
> 
> I never give any money to the S/RSPCA because I don't feel it gets used appropriately.
> 
> ...


Their Rescue centres are full to bursting... So animals must be being rescued!!! 2 + 2 = 4.....

I agree that it is so sad and heartbreaking when the system fails an animal like the dog you mentioned.
But the RSPCA can only do so much. Give your support to the RSPCA/SSPCA with their application for law changes through government. That would be a positive move from animal lovers to help, rather than a negative 'lets slag the RSPCA off'.


----------



## CarolineH (Aug 4, 2009)

Sadly the RSPCA are a charity. They can only act within the law so sometimes we see them as doing 'nothing'. Their inspectors may try their damnedest (I know our local ones do from experience of working closely with them as a dog warden) but their hands are tied to Head Office and if Head Office say no then they have to go with their decision. I dealt with a truly awful, stomach churning case of neglect once and for a year the RSPCA inspector and myself worked on putting a case together for prosecution, only to have HO decide that the owner was to recieve a written caution instead! The Inspector could barely look me in the face when he told me the result and shook his head to my incredulous "What the f---???" HO needs a kick up the backside but they seem to be a law unto themselves. The staff on the ground are worthy of far more on the whole and to blame a whole organisation on the grounds of one or two bad experiences with the HO is a little shortsighted IMHO. Hopefully one day it will have people in charge who are a little more in touch with reality but until that day comes, the RSPCA are all we have. I am not a fan (except of our inspectors) but I am not going to condemn them as a whole as I have also had good experiences of them where there have been positive outcomes.  I have also experienced some very ignorant and stupid shelter staff but not all of them are like that.:blushing:

Rather than float gently along the surface of life reacting only to things at face value, it wouldn't hurt for some people to look below the surface once in a while. After all, if they did not put all these unwanted animals down (there simply are not the homes for all the cats and dogs that are churned out) thern what would they do with them? As long as it is done quickly and humanely then the animals do not suffer and there is free space for those with a better chance of homing.


----------



## Lavenderb (Jan 27, 2009)

If our own social services can't get things right 100% of the time then what hope does an animal society have?

They are all bound by red tape and rules and regulations.


----------



## Izzie999 (Nov 27, 2008)

Hi,

Speaking from experience of seeking their help here. I rang them up as an old moggy had found his way into our garage and was in a terrible state, he was covered in ticks, extremely thin and generally looked very unwell. They came out after several phone calls seeking their help. They took one look at him and said "he is not sick enough for us to help him"" WTF!! 

I took him to our own vet who checked him over and bloodtested him. He was furious that I was left to foot the bill and reduced the cost of the fiv/felv test and consultation fee. He was clear for both those illnesses so we took him home and fed him up and cared for him until a local small rescue had space to take him on and find him a home. 

My opinion of the RSPCA is simple, they have those hypocritical shiny tv adverts asking for money which in my opinion is abused. The local rspca homing offices had a total refurbishment in a space of four years! 
They are on hand to help when there is a camera crew or newspaper journalist there for publicity. I will never donate to them, I have all the time in the world for the CPL and other small rescues. The RSPCA are a total waste of time. They may have been good in the far distant past but nowadays they are absolutely crap!!.

Izzie


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

CarolineH said:


> Sadly the RSPCA are a charity. They can only act within the law so sometimes we see them as doing 'nothing'.
> 
> Rather than float gently along the surface of life reacting only to things at face value, it wouldn't hurt for some people to look below the surface once in a while.




Well put Caroline!


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

gr33neyes said:


> If our own social services can't get things right 100% of the time then what hope does an animal society have?
> 
> They are all bound by red tape and rules and regulations.


Exactly..... Good point!

Systems are always gonna fail a small minority, people forget all the good outcomes and focus on the bad!


----------



## CarolineH (Aug 4, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> Exactly..... Good point!
> 
> Systems are always gonna fail a small minority, people forget all the good outcomes and focus on the bad!


Exactly! St Bernard case  Horse Cruelty Obese dog case Dog fight gang jailed Just a few examples of why the RSPCA may not be seen to act on 'smaller' cases. I suppose that due to their lack of government funding and reliance on donations, they have to prioritise?  Like I said previously, my own experience of them has been mixed but they are all we have. Maybe we should be more supportive instead of whinging at what they don't (can't) do?


----------



## oldDoubletrouble (Sep 21, 2009)

Well I can hardly comment on the RSPCA that was initially estalished almost 200 years ago?? is this right!

But the RSPCA that I remember so well from the sixties is miles apart from the one we know today! 

IMO they have totally ruined what they stand for in the past forty years! 
I could go on and on and on with stories relating to their misgivings, it would take me forever!

The top knobs their need to stand back and take a good long look at their organization and what has become of what was once a haven for ill treated animals.

I give them a very wide berth now! preparing to give any donations to the independents and other know organizations whose policies are focused on 'true' animal welfare.
DT


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> P.S After reading all that....remember most of the people who work there are 110% dedicated to animals welfare. Just like the majority of us on here.......
> 
> I love this forum but there are certain things on here that completely baffle me.........
> 
> As with all animal shelters/rescues they are not rich with endless cash to create many more centres for the poor unwanted animals of this society......but sometimes do the best they can. Yet many on here only have very very harsh words to say........


PAH 
Have you seen their headquarters compared to their sanctuaries :cursing::cursing:
OH they have plenty of money, but so much of it goes on making their headquarters as comfortable as possible
Yes the people on the ground mainly do sterling work, but it is like any other big organization, the people at the top seem to have lost what the RSPCA should be about in their never ending struggle to make their own lives more comfortable


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Double trouble said:


> I give them a very wide berth now! preparing to give any donations to the independents and other know organizations whose policies are focused on 'true' animal welfare.
> DT


Hi, the Head Office of the RSPCA and SSPCA are in the process of changing their policies as we speak. And have lobbied parliament for more powers to deal with cruelty and change laws. They are VERY restricted at the moment as to what they can do....


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

I don't know much about the RSPCA - but I do believe historically they did alot for animal welfare, raising awareness pushing for animal welfare in many situations.
However I do think they have lost their way a bit over the last few years.
It is worth remembering that they have no 'powers' and are restricted by the law to take action.
The people on the shop floor so to speak work very hard in a distressing enviroment - I do think Head office should continue to review their practices.

Someone once told me - not sure if it's true - that if you donate to your local shelter direct they get to keep that donation, therefore if you want to support your local shelter that's the best way to donate. However the inspectors wages, equipment and their legal fees etc are taken from central head office donations.


----------



## turkeylad (Mar 1, 2009)

&#304; disagree with much that they do and like so many charities &#304; do believe that they use there money inappropriately (plush offices - high salaried management) but &#304; agree that they are often judged harshly. Many other animal charities are as bad (&#304; read on another thread how much faith put in Cinamon Trust) to care or there dogs after they are gone ... my experience of them with be Yeah Good Luck!!! No animal charity is without its faults and sadly your right in this day an age of throw away consumerism animals get caught out.

&#304;n terms of funding outside the UK i can only say that without the monies from the RSPCA an &#304;FAW much of the work carried out here could not be achieved. Much of the animal welfare is a compromise within finite resources. &#304; hate it but unfortunately its a fact.


----------



## 0nyxx (Aug 9, 2008)

The RSPCA do some good work as the the St Bernard case etc, & our pet care laws are pathetic in comparison to the laws in America.

On personal dealings with the RSPCA a few days ago regarding to skinny unwanted 10 week old kittens, living in a house frequented by every drop out in the area.

Firstly it took me an hour to get through to them then there advice was stop feeding them they'll go home????? even when I explained they said they'd have to monitor the situation 1st, if I'd waited for them the kittens would have been dead!

We were feeding & caring for them because when they went home they were being chased away or ignored, & so hungry before we started feeding them they were fighting over scraps left out for the birds!!!!

The 1st time we fed them properly they wolfed down 1 1/2 tins of cat food because they hadnt eaten in days, I wormed & de flead them.

Then through the CPL found them new homes after the person who owned them said I could have them, when I explained in a couple of months they'd be pregnant & she'd be over run with kittens.

Thankfully both are now safe, warm & well fed instead of sleeping under an old shed scavenging for food as they were before we started feeding them.


----------



## JSR (Jan 2, 2009)

I could tell some stories but I won't because I still have to work alongside the local inspectors. And have alot of respect for some of them, they work bloody hard against the most intolerable odds sometimes. Needless to say I feel sometimes I'm in league with the devil but it's a necessary evil. I've met some wonderful people who work on the front line, some ignorant arrogant top management and some nasty pieces of work who run the centers.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

0nyxx said:


> The RSPCA do some good work as the the St Bernard case etc, & our pet care laws are pathetic in comparison to the laws in America.
> 
> On personal dealings with the RSPCA a few days ago regarding to skinny unwanted 10 week old kittens, living in a house frequented by every drop out in the area.
> 
> ...


Yes, in cases like this I would always contact a animal/breed specific charity!
Well done to you for helping the little angels


----------



## owieprone (Nov 6, 2008)

rona said:


> PAH
> Have you seen their headquarters compared to their sanctuaries :cursing::cursing:
> OH they have plenty of money, but so much of it goes on making their headquarters as comfortable as possible
> Yes the people on the ground mainly do sterling work, but it is like any other big organization, the people at the top seem to have lost what the RSPCA should be about in their never ending struggle to make their own lives more comfortable


ah good point rona. that's a common view for someone who doesn't know how a charity works... so...(again, due to the usual forum menace i will say this is to the forum as a whole not just rona)

As someone whose husband worked for a charity until recently i'll say this. WITHOUT that shining HQ, and the people who will work as hard or harder then everyone else for LESS than average wages (that's a FACT, if i worked there i would take a pay cut of over 6K, i get paid roughly 20k p/a in OXFORD its not cheap living here).

Without good infrastructure S/RSPCA wouldn't be able to do half of what they need to. The buildings they are in if the are 'fancy' is because lesser buildings or using more buildings scattered about costs MORE money in the long run than something that is purpose built or exactly what they need to run as efficiently and economically as possible.

The head honchos do lose the plot occasionally, for instance my husbands work.. their heads are comlete knobs and have ruined a whole dept through lack of foresight and actual knowledge of the dept. However they are trying to do it for the good of the company goal as a whole. They might be a bit misguided at times but they still provide an important service for FREE with no government help, they rely on donations which at the moment are like rocking horse ****. they are bound by the law and regulations, and by how much space and time their guys on the ground have to offer. this means that unfortunately animals who aren't in DIRE need have to be left, those that need expensive treatment have to be pts to give those that are rehousable a fighting chance.

how do we solve this?? DONATE!! and if you really care petition the gov to up their ability to remove animals WITHIN the law!

don't bleat if you don't help.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

owieprone said:


> ah good point rona. that's a common view for someone who doesn't know how a charity works... so...(again, due to the usual forum menace i will say this is to the forum as a whole not just rona)
> 
> As someone whose husband worked for a charity until recently i'll say this. WITHOUT that shining HQ, and the people who will work as hard or harder then everyone else for LESS than average wages (that's a FACT, if i worked there i would take a pay cut of over 6K, i get paid roughly 20k p/a in OXFORD its not cheap living here).
> 
> ...


Great post. I am glad there are others who can see the bigger picture! 

I mentioned the lobbying of government on this thread, and nodody here said a word!!!


----------



## turkeylad (Mar 1, 2009)

gr33neyes said:


> If our own social services can't get things right 100% of the time then what hope does an animal society have?
> 
> They are all bound by red tape and rules and regulations.


Because they have been around longer and are better funded!!


----------



## owieprone (Nov 6, 2008)

they are still bound by law. prices for EVERYTHING has gone up, the money doesn't go as far and they're not getting as much money.. there is only so much they can do with what they have. fewer people are volunteering now too, fewer people can afford to live on the low wages that charities pay. 

anyone has a problem with a charity, go work in it, see for yourself what the real problems are, then come back here and rant away... i can guarantee you will be ranting about the govs/EU red tape and other assorted bullballs and not the currently assumed lacksadaisical attitude of the charity.


----------



## turkeylad (Mar 1, 2009)

owieprone said:


> they are still bound by law. prices for EVERYTHING has gone up, the money doesn't go as far and they're not getting as much money.. there is only so much they can do with what they have. fewer people are volunteering now too, fewer people can afford to live on the low wages that charities pay.
> 
> anyone has a problem with a charity, go work in it, see for yourself what the real problems are, then come back here and rant away... i can guarantee you will be ranting about the govs/EU red tape and other assorted bullballs and not the currently assumed lacksadaisical attitude of the charity.


Worked for many Charities over 20 years Dr barnardos Nspcc etc and have seen at first hand how they waste mone.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2009)

They are about as useful as a chocolate teapot!

I posted this on the another thread so will repost here,
Interesting link,
RSPCA

These bits stand out,for me anyway,

There are reports of bully-boy tactics in seizing animals, often illegally, from people who have no wish to hurt animals. These seized animals are sometimes reported to be inadequately kept and to end up dead, with no chance for their legal owners to collect defence evidence. On the question of illegal seizure, the RSPCA has long known the law and has apparently knowingly flouted it, according to its own statements, in the pursuit of prosecutions.

RSPCA Inspectors have intimidating, police-like uniforms and read out peoples rights, telling them that "you are not under arrest ". What does that do to a respectable lady of 70 years? The terror can only be imagined. There are many cases in which it could be argued that education and communication were needed, not the strong arm of criminal law. Animal welfare, not convictions, should be the objective. Can a body, with a clear and manifest vested interest in prosecutions and with no constitutional checks and balances in place, be safe with this right and capability?

Many small, private animal rescue centres have been the subject of prosecutions. These centres attract funding from the animal-loving public, albeit in a small way, which might otherwise go to the RSPCA. One hopes that there is no connection between these facts. There is talk of licensing such establishments and the RSPCA is angling for the inspecting duty for this. Can a competing body, with no checks and balances, safely be granted such a role?

It may surprise the reader to know that there appear to be no controls over the RSPCA. There is a Police Complaints Commission; there is an Insurance Ombudsman; there are watchdogs for telephone, electricity and gas suppliers. There is no such person or body to apply checks and balances to the actions and activities of the RSPCA. It operates outside the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Nonetheless, this organisation has been given even more powers, through the Animal Welfare Act 2006 (successor to the Protection of Animals Act 1911).

Some recent cases to highight what an incompent bunch of idiots they are,

In Norwich in January, Judge Philip Browning was critical of the RSPCA's conduct in seizing a much-loved pony, Florry, which had been with Martin and Gina Griffin's family for 20 years. The RSPCA held Florry in an animal sanctuary for over a year, claiming that she was "emaciated". The Griffins' vet, Charlotte Mayers, made it clear from the start that vets from her practice were treating the horse, which was laminitic and needed to be kept thin for that reason. Colin Vogel, the author of the RSPCA's own veterinaray manual on horse-care supported her views. At one point the RSPCA had wanted to put Florry down, but after 15 months she was finally re-united with her owners.

In February, after another five days in court, a cruelty case against Annette Nally, owner of Holly, a German shepherd, was called into question when it was found that RSPCA documents alleging her failure to treat the dog properly for ear and bowel conditions related to another dog. Holly died six months after the RSPCA had seized her (as Miss Nally only discovered five months later). In acquitting her on all charges, Judge David Chinnery praised her obvious care for her animals and her "impressive" evidence, and also that of her chief witness, Colin Vogel.

PC Bell was prosecuted for cruelty by the RSPCA and the case dragged on for two years, at a cost of £50,000. After his initial acquittal, the RSPCA appealed. Finally, in April 2006, the High Court threw out the case, prompting the Federation of Companion Animal Societies to comment that some of the RSPCA's prosecutions "seem to have a political agenda" rather than being concerned with "animal welfare". The growing number of people who fall foul of that agenda would heartily agree.


----------



## JSR (Jan 2, 2009)

Believe me I've seen where alot of money has been spent by the RSPCA. Shocking.


----------



## rebenda (Jan 1, 2009)

if u workd for the rspca u wud understand that there are very few inspectors and welfare officers and they have alot of work they work 12 hr shifts then go on call for 7 hours the whole time having no break they are so busy!which is why it enfuriates me when people who dnt have a clue say they didnt come out to me bla bla, yes its annoying but they have to put their wrk in order of emergency. Regards to pts only unhealthy or aggresive animals are pts, we fill fosters/staff and rehoming centres as well as family and friends with animals for rehoming. Wot else do people want us to do. I have given the poster rwp as it is about time something were sed and this is one of the thins i hate about this site as i know wt goes on and the rubbish we get from people, i personally in the last to days have had alot of threats and violence frm people we are trying to help in the hospitals.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

rebenda said:


> if u workd for the rspca u wud understand that there are very few inspectors and welfare officers and they have alot of work they work 12 hr shifts then go on call for 7 hours the whole time having no break they are so busy!which is why it enfuriates me when people who dnt have a clue say they didnt come out to me bla bla, yes its annoying but they have to put their wrk in order of emergency. Regards to pts only unhealthy or aggresive animals are pts, we fill fosters/staff and rehoming centres as well as family and friends with animals for rehoming. Wot else do people want us to do. I have given the poster rwp as it is about time something were sed and this is one of the thins i hate about this site as i know wt goes on and the rubbish we get from people, i personally in the last to days have had alot of threats and violence frm people we are trying to help in the hospitals.


I have given you rep for this post! x


----------



## owieprone (Nov 6, 2008)

and which normal company/gov branch can you NOT say that about?

things go wrong, they always will, people in the organisations will be heavy handed when they don't need to be and pussyfoot around when they shouldn't. mostly they're doing their best with limited resources.

money has to be spent on things to upgrade, make things more efficient. Like my husband and 2 others in his team, losing their job for instance.. will save the company 100's of thousands a year due to a new system that COST 100's of thousands to buy, install and get running. You might not always see the benefit of it until you see how it cuts costs in the long run. in this instance it could have been handled better an one of those 3 guys could have kept their job and got a new qualification out of it, but this particular charity were abit blinkered and have to now recruit from outside the company. stupid but there you go. it WILL save them loads of donation money that can go towards helping whoever.


if you don't vote you can't whinge when the gov do something you don't agree with, no difference with supporting a charity, if you don't support them you then can't turn around and say they're useless.


----------



## Ducky (Nov 23, 2008)

tillysdream said:


> I agree, the RSPCA/SSPCA are judged harshly.
> 
> They have to work within the law, they can't just take peoples animals off them. There has to be a clear picture of neglect. I can understand members frustration, but we do not live in the a perfect world, and the RSPCA is not perfect!
> 
> ...





owieprone said:


> ah good point rona. that's a common view for someone who doesn't know how a charity works... so...(again, due to the usual forum menace i will say this is to the forum as a whole not just rona)
> 
> As someone whose husband worked for a charity until recently i'll say this. WITHOUT that shining HQ, and the people who will work as hard or harder then everyone else for LESS than average wages (that's a FACT, if i worked there i would take a pay cut of over 6K, i get paid roughly 20k p/a in OXFORD its not cheap living here).
> 
> ...


agree with both these posts. they are very restricted within the law about what they can do. unfortunately there are always going to be sad cases where an animal loses its life through ill treatment, but they arent superheroes. they cant save everyone. its the sad truth, but at least they are there, at least there is something there to try and help.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2009)

owieprone said:


> if you don't support them you then can't turn around and say they're useless.


I would say it's the other way around LOL 

I don't support them,I do think they are next to useless,I've previously had dealing's with them which was not pleasant.

I would rather support my own breed rescue


----------



## lizward (Feb 29, 2008)

Well, let's see, these are the cases known to me personally in my immediate location:

1. RSPCA called out to take in a feral cat and kittens. Destroyed all the kittens, then the mother, rioght there in front of the person who called them out.

2. RSPCA called out to problem involving travellers' horses dumped in a field in the summer of 1995 - this in Yorkshire where there had been no rain for weeks - mares with foals were being kept alive only by locals taking them buckets of water. RSPCA could do nothing. But ..

3. Cat breeder with cat with limp, under veterinary treatment, RSPCA seized the cat, note through owner's door, it took threats of action phoned through to national headquarters to get that cat back.

4. Baby pigeon taken into local branch, the person who took it in was told "we haven't got time to deal with baby pigeons and if you leave it here it will be destroyed" - now, yes, pigeons are a pest, but I bet they wouldn't have said that if the cameras had been rolling!

5. Perfect home for small dog - active retired lady at home all day and accustomed to taking dogs for long walks, own small private garden, but she lived in a flat. Therefore she could not have a dog.

Then there are other horror stories like the RSPCA destroying an elderly MICROCHIPPED cat on the spot, simply because the neighbours said they didn't know who it belonged to, the RSPCA threatening to report a lady to social services and get her children taken away if she did not hand over her beloved pedigree breeding cats, plenty of other examples - a search through the archives here will reveal plenty for a start!

The RSPCA will never get a penny from me until 1. they stop their persecution of breeders 2. they stop giving the impression that they rehome animals rather than destroy them and 3. they stop their stupid blanket policies that stop animlas going to perfectly good homes.

Liz


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

sallyanne said:


> I would say it's the other way around LOL
> 
> I don't support them,I do think they are next to useless,I've previously had dealing's with them which was not pleasant.
> 
> I would rather support my own breed rescue


Surely less funding would make the situation worse?

Are we all animals lovers or not?

I can't see your logic?

But respect your views!


----------



## WelshOneEmma (Apr 11, 2009)

rona said:


> PAH
> Have you seen their headquarters compared to their sanctuaries :cursing::cursing:
> OH they have plenty of money, but so much of it goes on making their headquarters as comfortable as possible
> Yes the people on the ground mainly do sterling work, but it is like any other big organization, the people at the top seem to have lost what the RSPCA should be about in their never ending struggle to make their own lives more comfortable


This is the problem with any large organisation, the people at the top control the money, and make sure they are looked after. Just look at all the problems we are having in hospitals at the moment. If we can take the fatcats out, and have people in there who want to see the money spent on the animals rather than themselves, you have already made a huge difference.

There are many problems within the RSPCA- the shelters don't have enough money, i would imagine that they only fight the big, guaranteed to win court cases (otherwise it would be seen to be a waste of money), and they have to work within the law. I also think that sometimes with these organisations, they don't use any common sense when it comes to rehoming. My aunt would foster and re-home cats for the CPL. Based on how she was, I would never give money to them (I may do so now). On her house checks, she would go round with a white glove. If your house was dusty, you would not get a cat. If you worked, you would not get one. I have 3 cats, and they are so spoilt, yet she would not give one to me.

I personally have called the RSPCA on two occasions: once when I heard my neighbours beating their dog and once when we saw some horses in a field, middle of December, no shelter or water (it had frozen) and they were incredibly thin. The neighbours had a visit the following day, had regular ones, and we never heard the dog being beaten again. The horses were removed from the field within two days.

Whilst I see that they can do good, at the moment if I found an abandoned animal, I would personally look after it myself, rather than hand it over. With the current economic climate, so many animals are being abandoned. They have no choice to PTS a lot of them. It is harsh, but as a society we have to blame ourselves for that.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Lizward, nobody has said that the RSPCA never fail animals...

But we are trying to get people to see the bigger picture, and not to forget the GOOD work they do.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> Surely less funding would make the situation worse?
> 
> Are we all animals lovers or not?
> 
> ...


I have had dealing's with them twice previously.
God only knows who the inspector's think they are,they were or tried to be intimidating,sorry doesn't wash with me I know MY Rights,they were downright rude and unpleasant.

If they want more funding then they should get there house in order and teach inspector's to respect owners.

I would prefer to support my breed rescue.


----------



## tinamary (Aug 17, 2008)

rebenda said:


> Regards to pts only unhealthy or aggresive animals are pts, QUOTE]
> 
> Im sorry but that is so not true. I have volunteered in a Homing shelter and it is certainly not true. I have seen healthy dogs put to sleep because they wanted to bring some new dogs into the shelter to try to earn more money.
> 
> I have a regard for some of the things they do but im afraid they need to get into this century now and get rid of some of the top knobs and get more people on the ground.


----------



## owieprone (Nov 6, 2008)

sallyanne said:


> I would say it's the other way around LOL
> 
> I don't support them,I do think they are next to useless,I've previously had dealing's with them which was not pleasant.
> 
> I would rather support my own breed rescue


:001_tt2: lol

have to say i don't support them either, but i do think they are trying their best, their company agenda just needs nuking and rebuiling 

problem is if you don't support them then use them.. you're not 'repaying' them for their work, they've thenlost revenue and had no support for it... and it's exactly why there are big problems.. also lots of little local charities etc taking money away from the big charities, means even less funds for them and more problems.

not saying thats a bad thing, i myself prefer to donate and adopt from our local animal lot. the only big org i give money to is RSPB, simply becuase they save the habitats, not just the birds that live there.


----------



## GSDlover4ever (Feb 21, 2009)

i know of a case where i phoned the SSPCA - sadly it took them a year to get all of those dogs off them - that was because the animals had water (even though it was green) were in kennels and had shelter - even though the kennels were maggot infested and were basically cleaned 2-4 weeks. food was thrown in. over all the animals were living in squalor! 

but because of the stupid law they couldn't do much and thats why it took so long for them to get the dogs away safely.

i know the SSPCA inspector in question constantly pestered the people who owned these dogs - asking them to hand them over and to provide better living conditions etc.....
i applaud her for that!
sadly 2 of the dogs had to be destroyed but the others got new homes.


however i did work experience at this same rescue and it wasn't a good experience. especially from the staff - they were very bit*hy and it was obvious that they felt they had the power over a volunteer - i got all the crappy jobs that they didn't want to do.
for instance on one day i had to bleach about 10 kennels in one day and i asked them if i could do something else as my eyes were getting soar and my hands were getting soar as well (i have sensitive skin)- they said no!
the people that worked there were just sitting in a room chatting - they weren't doing anything - so they could have easily helped me!

before i did the work experienced i wanted to be a volunteer - i waited a year to do it -because i didn't reply ASAP when they sent me a letter about me doing work experience - they sent me another stating that it was too late to do it - the reason i didn't respond was because i was on holiday!

so overall they are good and bad in every practice - i personally would prefer to work with a different SSPCA or other or other organisation.


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

the only contact ive had with them has been rubbish 

Called them to help animals to only get told they cant/wont do anything 

Had a visit from a pretty thick officer who didnt have a clue about snakes and thier care, we told her to come back and see us again when she knew about snakes then we could have a chat  she never did come back lol


----------



## owieprone (Nov 6, 2008)

GSDlover4ever said:


> however i did work experience at this same rescue and it wasn't a good experience. especially from the staff - they were very bit*hy and it was obvious that they felt they had the power over a volunteer - i got all the crappy jobs that they didn't want to do.
> for instance on one day i had to bleach about 10 kennels in one day and i asked them if i could do something else as my eyes were getting soar and my hands were getting soar as well (i have sensitive skin)- they said no!
> the people that worked there were just sitting in a room chatting - they weren't doing anything - so they could have easily helped me!
> QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Tink82 (Mar 22, 2009)

I think that, like the police/doctors etc etc, they are tied by laws that restrict what they can and cannot do. I don't doubt their dedication at all but I think many laws need updating.

It is the law that fails us, not the proffesionals IMO


----------



## GSDlover4ever (Feb 21, 2009)

owieprone said:


> GSDlover4ever said:
> 
> 
> > however i did work experience at this same rescue and it wasn't a good experience. especially from the staff - they were very bit*hy and it was obvious that they felt they had the power over a volunteer - i got all the crappy jobs that they didn't want to do.
> ...


----------



## lauren001 (Jun 30, 2008)

> Whilst I see that they can do good, at the moment if I found an abandoned animal, I would personally look after it myself, rather than hand it over. With the current economic climate, so many animals are being abandoned. They have no choice to PTS a lot of them. It is harsh, but as a society we have to blame ourselves for that.


I agree, some things we do need the RSPCA for ie in the beaten dog scenario or where it may be dangerous to confront owners, or for real cruelty cases but in the case of abandoned, lost or neglected or injured animals there is actually a lot we can do ourselves, we can take them to vets for treatment, or the CP or to private rescue or wildlife centres or contact the local dog warden or keep them ourselves until the owners are found or until new homes can be arranged. There is no need to involve the RSPCA at all.

It is easy to just ring up the RSPCA for a stray cat, stray dog or injured wildlife etc, but there is so much we can do ourselves rather than moan when the RSPCA officer has to put them down because they would be extremely difficult to rehome.


----------



## JSR (Jan 2, 2009)

rebenda said:


> if u workd for the rspca u wud understand that there are very few inspectors and welfare officers and they have alot of work they work 12 hr shifts then go on call for 7 hours the whole time having no break they are so busy!which is why it enfuriates me when people who dnt have a clue say they didnt come out to me bla bla, yes its annoying but they have to put their wrk in order of emergency. Regards to pts only unhealthy or aggresive animals are pts, we fill fosters/staff and rehoming centres as well as family and friends with animals for rehoming. Wot else do people want us to do. I have given the poster rwp as it is about time something were sed and this is one of the thins i hate about this site as i know wt goes on and the rubbish we get from people, i personally in the last to days have had alot of threats and violence frm people we are trying to help in the hospitals.


They do put perfectly healthy animals down, even one's with foster homes lined up. I have had many a issue regarding this, and have even had firm homes lined up for certain special cases only to find within the time it's taken me to ring the center the animal has been PTS. YOUR centre you work at might have a different policy but each centre manager has decisions over what goes and what stays and alot of them are little hitlers with a very very itchy needle finger. MY very own cat came to me because the inspector wouldn't take him to the center because she knew he'd be pts because they were full, she constantly has upto 10 cats in her own home that she rehomes privately because she knows they will die if she takes them there.

I will never ever forgive the RSPCA for killing a young deaf, blind pup who I had spent alot of time finding a experienced home for. The inspector in good faith took him to the animal center to be chipped and checked over before we transported him to his new home and the manager took it upon herself to instantly pts because he was deaf and blind. I don't care what anyone says I will not support ANY society that employee's those sorts of people.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2009)

owieprone said:


> ah good point rona. that's a common view for someone who doesn't know how a charity works... so...(again, due to the usual forum menace i will say this is to the forum as a whole not just rona)
> 
> As someone whose husband worked for a charity until recently i'll say this. WITHOUT that shining HQ, and the people who will work as hard or harder then everyone else for LESS than average wages (that's a FACT, if i worked there i would take a pay cut of over 6K, i get paid roughly 20k p/a in OXFORD its not cheap living here).
> 
> ...


I know facts


----------



## GSDlover4ever (Feb 21, 2009)

JSR said:


> alot of them are little hitlers with a very very itchy needle finger.


that was the case at the SSPCA centre i was at as well!

i don't think they liked me because i asked "to many questions" 

quite a lot of people i have spoken to with regards to this centre have had a bad experience too - but others have had great experience at other SSPCA centres!


----------



## JSR (Jan 2, 2009)

GSDlover4ever said:


> that was the case at the SSPCA centre i was at as well!
> 
> i don't think they liked me because i asked "to many questions"
> 
> quite a lot of people i have spoken to with regards to this centre have had a bad experience too - but others have had great experience at other SSPCA centres!


Ohhh no don't ask questions!! Don't show any level of education or question the authority!!  They want yes men, and those that say no are pushed out one way or the other.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2009)

I got some good help from them when my cat (Muffin bless his soul now sleeping with angels) got stuck on the co op roof, they had to rescue him, I gave a nice donation & even when they rescued him from pipes that were being laid for new housing. Yep one of them the lil minx.
However, I reported my next door neighbour as I thought his dog looked distressed & it's owner was just leaving it's poo in the yard to mount up.
They told me to get in touch with enviromental health!!!!!! after a year of pleading & complaining, & many visits from e v m h. The dog was taken away, £3,000 worth of kennel & vet's bills, owner (g/friend) got to keep the other dog, got £350 fine. He had to go back to court for sentencing, banned for going into any home with dog, & owning an animal for 3 years, (he decided to go to the doc's pleeding depression) so no sentence as yet. (and he worked in a care home) his home (rented) minging.
The dog had flee's, it had scratched most of it;s fur away leaving a thickening of the skin, infection. I thought the dog was very old (nope 2 yrs old). The reason it walked so slow (bearing in mind it never went out of a tiny yard or walked) it's claws were growing under it's paws & digging into its feet. So go figure where were the RSPCA then, I was told by them as long as the animal has a roof & is being fed it is in no danger


----------



## GSDlover4ever (Feb 21, 2009)

JSR said:


> Ohhh no don't ask questions!! Don't show any level of education or question the authority!!  They want yes men, and those that say no are pushed out one way or the other.


sadly that is so true - especially with the SSPCA centre i was at!


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2009)

They need to be abit less harsh on people intrested in rehoming a dog from them and abit more harsh on people that neglect there dogs..I mean we have reported people before that locks there dog out in a shed all day and night..All the RSPCA said was it has food, water and shelter what else does it need! Yet they wont rehome certain dogs to house holds that work a few hours a week or the other lame excuse's we all keep hearing.

As a rescue center that is putting down the amount of dogs a week they are i would have thought instead of saying an out right no to some one becuase of there life style they would help them work around it correctly so the dog gets the best life with the people intrested and is one less dog for the kennels to have to deal with! that wont happen though because that means more work for them..


----------



## waterlilyold (Aug 28, 2009)

I used to volunteer at the rspca and they were really rude. After all I was picking up ****, and thats how they treated me, like ****. I was doing it for nothing, thats why they aways need volunteers cause they don't respect them.

We have a rat hoarding case here where 900 rats are in a squalid shed with inbreeding rampant and do they care enough to help the rat rescue ? nope. so much for all creatures great and Small. Apparently rats don't make the cut.


----------



## rebenda (Jan 1, 2009)

tinamary said:


> rebenda said:
> 
> 
> > Regards to pts only unhealthy or aggresive animals are pts, QUOTE] Im sorry but that is so not true. I have volunteered in a Homing shelter and it is certainly not true. I have seen healthy dogs put to sleep because they wanted to bring some new dogs into the shelter to try to earn more money. I have a regard for some of the things they do but im afraid they need to get into this century now and get rid of some of the top knobs and get more people on the ground.
> ...


----------



## lauren001 (Jun 30, 2008)

I think many dogs/cats who are in bad situations are left in those conditions by the RSPCA inspectors, because one no real crime has been committed as dictated by the law and two the animal probably in a lot of cases faces certain death if it is taken into RSPCA care as it is one who would be difficult or impossible to rehome.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

I'm afraid my experiences with them have all been negative- several cases of cruelty (in one the dog was virtually hairless due to her owner preferring to spend all her money on **** instead of vet treatment) that I or someone I know has reported have either been labelled 'not their problem' or if they have investigated they claim there is no neglect when there obviously is, just providing food, water & a bed is not IMO proper animal care, its like comparing living to merely existing


----------



## GSDlover4ever (Feb 21, 2009)

tinamary said:


> rebenda said:
> 
> 
> > Regards to pts only unhealthy or aggresive animals are pts, QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## orchid1 (Aug 12, 2009)

I too have no time for the RSPCA years ago I called them out to rescue a pigeon they wouldnt come out they practically said it was classed as vermin and never bothered so I would never give them a penny I prefer the Blue Cross charity myself( the pigeon had injured his wing)


----------



## rebenda (Jan 1, 2009)

We get injured pigeons in all the time brought from the public and inspectors.

no animal is classed as vermin in my mind... 


some humans are though


----------



## rebenda (Jan 1, 2009)

I also agree that managers get tooo much money and a nice comfy office...we need a new floor cleaning machine and new beds for the animals but unfortunatley they are in control of my job so we have to get on with the job with the things we have. 

i have never come across a healthy animal be pts and if it got threatened to then one of the staff would take it no doubt in my mind. 

Think about what this country would be like without the rspca for example a woman who an inspector is working on a case on so she can gain access into her house, her 6 week old kittens eye has been hanging out for weeks riddled in fleas mites worms, ?Just be left if there were no rspca...all the people who use our hospitals who cant afford private veterinary treatment? and thats hundreds of thousands of people we see at least 100 people a day with ther animals and work through the night on emergencys! 

the welfare officers who have rescued hundreds and thousands of animals in different situations, i.e. a cat trapped face down between a wall?

a deer hit on the motorway, a rotwieler with parvo virus from someones home. i could carrying on the list for a long long time, 

trust me the staff WORK the public just see the front of the rubbish National call centre and the inspectors and welfare officers on some of the calls they can answer i see their log books i here their phones not stopping i see the police all the time coming to be back up so they can force entry into peoples homes who abandon their animals or just refuse to open their doors to people trying to help them and their animals.

yes SOME inspectors/welfare officers think their something special and dont help at all but arnt they people like that in every different business and charity. the rspca need help not critisism people need to complain to management about the problems so something can be done not just gossip to each other, if u arnt going to complain to management then just shut up because you dont realise, 

thankyou to the people who do support the rspca and giving it to the branches is better then straight to the charity as the branches raise alot of the money on their own and get in HUGE amount of debt to neuter and vaccinate give medical treatment and feed the animals.


----------



## Tigerneko (Jan 2, 2009)

This thread started off quite well - with people quite rightly explaining that if it weren't for the head office, red tape and restrictions upon ACO's and Inspectors, then a lot more would be done. The collection officers and inspectors don't go into the job with a view to ignoring people's calls and doing nothing all day, they wouldn't have gone into that area of work if thats all they wanted to do.

You can't always go and directly blame the person that came out to your call - that's like blaming the waitress for your meal being burnt - blame the chef, not the poor girl who's sent over to your table with the plate!

Yes, it's frustrating when you don't get the outcome you want from reporting something, but just think how frustrating it is for the inspector when they spend god knows how many hours putting a case together just for it to be rejected by somebody above them. they then have to inform you, and you take it out on them.

How many of you who had a negative experience actually honestly contacted the head office to complain? 

I am not against the RSPCA - I work at one of their rescue centres, but I think there is a lot of room for improvement from head office in the way that they treat pretty much everyone but themselves. My centre has been wanting to refurbish the whole place for 20 years now, it is very grotty and isn't a nice place for animals, staff or visitors to be, but head office supply the rescue centre with such a little amount of money that it's impossible for us to be able to afford it.

I understand anyone who won't donate to the RSPCA - I wouldn't donate through the adverts because most of that money goes straight to head office, us at the bottom of the ladder in the rescue centers will probably never see a single penny of that money. If you're going to donate to the RSPCA, it's much better to donate money directly to your rescue centre.... or donate toys, food and beds for the animals, because at least then you know it will be put towards what you want (and what the public think from the adverts) the money money goes to.


----------



## oldDoubletrouble (Sep 21, 2009)

Verbatim said:


> This thread started off quite well - with people quite rightly explaining that if it weren't for the head office, red tape and restrictions upon ACO's and Inspectors, then a lot more would be done. The collection officers and inspectors don't go into the job with a view to ignoring people's calls and doing nothing all day, they wouldn't have gone into that area of work if thats all they wanted to do.
> 
> You can't always go and directly blame the person that came out to your call - that's like blaming the waitress for your meal being burnt - blame the chef, not the poor girl who's sent over to your table with the plate!
> 
> ...


A great post by my old friend! Well said you, So you are suggesting that we can help te shelters in other ways by making donations to them rather then H/O - does the same apply with cash donations may I ask?

Hope you are doing OK by the way!
lol
DT


----------



## Tigerneko (Jan 2, 2009)

Double trouble said:


> A great post by my old friend! Well said you, So you are suggesting that we can help te shelters in other ways by making donations to them rather then H/O - does the same apply with cash donations may I ask?
> 
> Hope you are doing OK by the way!
> lol
> DT


Thanks 

Yeah, if you were to call one of the rescue centres you'd probably be able to set up a direct debit to them personally if you wanted to donate a certain amount monthly or whatever (although that'll depend on the centre cos they all have their own individual ways of doing things, so some might not allow it, but I don't see why not!)

otherwise, all rescues are always crying out for basic equipment like dog leads, blankets, beds, toys, collars and food cos all those things cost money, especially blankets which get ruined quickly by destructive or dirty animals, they can be quite expensive to replace! We have all sorts of stuff for blankets - people give us old duvet covers, tablecloths, towels, sheets... it's all better than nothing! 

I am fine thanks! Back to college now so it's gonna be busy busy again soon  how's our DT? It's lovely to have you back :thumbup:


----------



## Nina (Nov 2, 2007)

I must apologise for not reading this thread fully, being answering the initial question, but I have little time these days, its late and I am absolutely knackered  Ooops, am I allowed to use that word :blushing:

Like a lot of forum members, I have not always found the RSPCA to be very helpful, but I do still have dealings with them on twitter and one of my sitters actually sits on the board of the Cambridgeshire branch.

The people that I know within the organisation are wonderful, hardworking people, who are passionate about animal welfare, so I feel that it is important NOT to tar them all with the same brush. However, I understand the frustrating of calling them only to be told there is little they can do, or rushing into a situation that has been largely malicious, as happened with one of our clients.

Okay, thats my opinion on the matter, for what its worth


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Verbatim said:


> This thread started off quite well - with people quite rightly explaining that if it weren't for the head office, red tape and restrictions upon ACO's and Inspectors, then a lot more would be done. The collection officers and inspectors don't go into the job with a view to ignoring people's calls and doing nothing all day, they wouldn't have gone into that area of work if thats all they wanted to do.
> 
> You can't always go and directly blame the person that came out to your call - that's like blaming the waitress for your meal being burnt - blame the chef, not the poor girl who's sent over to your table with the plate!
> 
> ...


i agree with Sue! great post Portia! xx


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2009)

Yeah i agree Verbatim alot of room for improvment.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2009)

These are examples of wages
RSPCA || Careers

RSPCA Essex South and Southend Branch

This is interesting

WELCOME TO OUR SITE
We are the Essex South and Southend Branch of the RSPCA and we welcome you to our website. Like all the other 170 plus RSPCA branches we are separate from the National Headquarters and are a self funding charity.

The aims of the Branch are to promote the welfare of animals within the Essex South and Southend area. We receive no Government funding for the work that we do, and all that we achieve is purely through the help of our volunteers, our own fundraising activities, and our four charity shops.


----------



## oldDoubletrouble (Sep 21, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> i agree with Sue! great post Portia! xx


I wish she'd change her name back don't you Noush!!!


----------



## mindymoo (Jul 5, 2009)

HighPr00 said:


> I guess you've never had to ring them and ask for help regards an act of cruelty or neglect?


Thumbs up to that, they are useless. I phoned ref. a neighbours westie who was left out in the garden (lead trapped in door) in all weather with no food and water and no shelter. They went round there, they put on a sob story how her husband had died a year previous and then called me and practically accused me of making it up!!!

Also where I used to live up North there were lots of strays, I used to bring the ones home that I found, initially I tried phoning the RSPCA to collect, 2 days I was told...they just dont care...ended up taking the dogs to a local shelter myself.

It also annoys me how they make out they are stuggling in adverts when they are probably one of the richest charities in the UK.

Rnt over lol needless to say I disapprove :001_tt2:


----------



## Tigerneko (Jan 2, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> i agree with Sue! great post Portia! xx





DevilDogz said:


> Yeah i agree Verbatim alot of room for improvment.


Thanks 



rona said:


> These are examples of wages
> RSPCA || Careers
> 
> RSPCA Essex South and Southend Branch
> ...


Yep, that is true. I may be wrong, but I think HO do give the rescue centres a bit of money, but its practically insignificant in comparison to the amount of money the rescues need to run efficentely. It's a little bit like a franchise really, with each rescue being run by seperate individuals. That's why polices differ so much, and why one RSPCA rescue will let people with young kids adopt animals and why some won't - because they make up those policies according to what the people at that individual centre think is right to do.



Double trouble said:


> I wish she'd change her name back don't you Noush!!!


:laugh: i've actually been thinking of changing my name again, i've gone off this one :001_tt2: no idea what to change it to though!!


----------



## oldDoubletrouble (Sep 21, 2009)

Verbatim said:


> Thanks
> 
> :laugh: i've actually been thinking of changing my name again, i've gone off this one :001_tt2: no idea what to change it to though!!


Back to postia I say! I know one person who would be 'appy!! our Noush!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Double trouble said:


> I wish she'd change her name back don't you Noush!!!


pmsl i cant keep up with these name changes DT Ninja's another one! i dont know who im talking to half the time!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Double trouble said:


> Back to postia I say! I know one person who would be 'appy!! our Noush!


 i would be very appy! lol


----------



## Tigerneko (Jan 2, 2009)

hehe I don't like using my real name though :laugh:

I could change it to Porsha :001_tt2:


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2009)

Anyone got the inclination to trawl through this for the relevant information 

http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/Blo...here=1236788687922&blobheader=application/pdf

Most of the figures in here are in millions, multiple millions


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

:


Verbatim said:


> hehe I don't like using my real name though :laugh:
> 
> I could change it to Porsha :001_tt2:


Oo i like that! and it wouldnt confuse me to much!:thumbup:xx


----------



## orchid1 (Aug 12, 2009)

rebenda said:


> We get injured pigeons in all the time brought from the public and inspectors.
> 
> no animal is classed as vermin in my mind...
> 
> some humans are though


All animals and birds deserve our respect I thought it was a very uncaring attitude to have for an animal charity


----------



## Cat_Crazy (Jul 15, 2009)

I thought I would give my views on this subject, from the inside, so to speak.

I am actually the cat re-homing officer for my local RSPCA branch (completely un-paid along with all our 34 staff) 
I guess that makes me power mad and a little needle happy?

I understand where a lot of people are coming from and will be the first to say that the RSPCA have failed a LOT of animals but remember there is only so much we can do.

As for putting healthy animals to sleep my branch has NEVER done that. In my 4 years of rescue work I have only ever put 1 cat to sleep and that was Meg, a 17 year old female who was so riddled with tumours that she could barely stand.

I cried for weeks about having to put Meg to sleep and had her cremated to take home with me.

I completely disagree with a LOT of the policies the national RSPCA set and think it needs to change but us people at the bottom are working as hard as we can in our local branches to help. There is only so much we can do and sometimes when things get tough bad decissions are made but we are only human, we get things wrong.

Several months back the RSPCA rescued a large number of cats (88 to be exact) from one home where they were being neglected, our branch alone took 18 of those. Many times I was urged by the people above me to put the cats to sleep as they had a lot of injuries, a lot of treatment to pay for and a VERY long rehabilitation but not one of them was.

The last cat from that 18 was re-homed just a few weeks ago after nearly a year of treatment and I could of cried with joy!

Some of the things we see are sickening and we have to grin and bear it and do our best, we have a lot of things going on and have to prioritise.

I had a very angry young lady on the phone to me earlier today as she has taken a dog from her neighbour that she believed was being neglected and I had to refuse to take the dog.

This is not because I do not want to help or that I want the dog to suffer but we have to stick within the laws, if I take the dog then I can be prosecuted for theft.

Things have to go through the proper chanels and as hard as it is we do have to make difficult decissions like this, when no-one has the answer you are relying on human instinct and we all know that it can sometimes let us down.

Please remember when you say how awful the RSPCA is that some people dedicate their lives to animal welfare and are doing their very best to find some good in a very cruel world.

The national RSPCA may not be up to much but the local independant branches are doing the best they can.


----------



## Cat_Crazy (Jul 15, 2009)

Verbatim said:


> Thanks
> 
> Yep, that is true. I may be wrong, but I think HO do give the rescue centres a bit of money, but its practically insignificant in comparison to the amount of money the rescues need to run efficentely. It's a little bit like a franchise really, with each rescue being run by seperate individuals. That's why polices differ so much, and why one RSPCA rescue will let people with young kids adopt animals and why some won't - because they make up those policies according to what the people at that individual centre think is right to do.
> 
> :laugh: i've actually been thinking of changing my name again, i've gone off this one :001_tt2: no idea what to change it to though!!


The national RSPCA do not give a penny to the independant RSPCA branches, we raise our own funds and rely on that.

The affiliated RSPCA branches (as in working with the national) do get some funds but not very much.

Most money that goes to the national is spent on campaining and awareness (t.v ad's etc) if you want your donation to go direct to the animals you need to donate to your local branch so they can make the best use of it.


----------



## bassetsandbeyond (Jun 21, 2009)

i have no issues reguarding the rspca. But with most things, you don't know what happens behind closed doors.
Being around alot of dogshows you do hear things.
Specially the companion shows. At my local town we hold an annual dogshow every year. This year they had a hard time getting hold of a judge because there was pedigree classes and the show monies was going to the rspca.

Most people that judge shows said because of the "pedigree dogs exposed" most dog breeders are not donating to the rspca and instead to dogstrust, KC and own Breed rescues etc. I still yet to find out why????

Like i said i have no issues (as of yet ) with the rspca. BTW i still watch Animal hospital on sky with rolph harris lol


----------



## Tigerneko (Jan 2, 2009)

Cat_Crazy said:


> The national RSPCA do not give a penny to the independant RSPCA branches, we raise our own funds and rely on that.
> 
> The affiliated RSPCA branches (as in working with the national) do get some funds but not very much.
> 
> Most money that goes to the national is spent on campaining and awareness (t.v ad's etc) if you want your donation to go direct to the animals you need to donate to your local branch so they can make the best use of it.


Thanks for that 

My branch must be an affiliated branch because i'm sure I was told we get a ridiculously small amount of money from HO. I always reccommend that people donate straight to the rescue centres rather than head office.


----------



## CarolineH (Aug 4, 2009)

mindymoo said:


> Also where I used to live up North there were lots of strays, I used to bring the ones home that I found, initially I tried phoning the RSPCA to collect, 2 days I was told...they just dont care...ended up taking the dogs to a local shelter myself.


That is because for more than a few years now, the responsibility for collection of strays (straight off the streets and from people who have detained them) has rested with local councils who employ dog wardens to do that job. The RSPCA is a charity and there fore does not have the responsibility for collection of strays.


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

Apparently, my friend went to do work experience with the RSPCA and they PTS a dog that was chewing the bars. They thought it would turn out to be aggressive.  :cursing: How stupid is that? I don't support them at all, I'd much rather support charities that do not PTS, such as Dogs Trust.


----------



## Laureng05 (Oct 2, 2009)

I feel that the RSPCA have good intensions just have no Rights.

The RSPCA inspectors that I have come across that bring sick animals to my veterinary practice have all been very kind and loving towards the animals they bring in.
I always wanted to be an inspector and I feel that they do what they can for animals.
At the end of the day I feel that the inspectors , the majority, are great its just that they do not have enough authoriy. They do not have sufficient authority to do the things they need to and this is why peolple dont like them.

At the end of the day, the RSPCA are there to help animals and I feel that they deserve a great deal of respect as they do ALOT more than alot of us do to help animals.

Thats my view .

Lauren x


----------



## oldDoubletrouble (Sep 21, 2009)

Just out of intrest would someone who knows please confirm for me who actually makes the decision of which animals are euthanized, and how are these chosen!
Thanks in advance
regards
DT

I do have a very good reason for asking this, which I shall share with you when I have received any replies


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

HighPr00 said:


> I guess you've never had to ring them and ask for help regards an act of cruelty or neglect?[/QUOTE
> Totaly agree Ive contacted them numerous times about neglected/starved/ even shot animals and never got a response! they love to drive around in their nice new vans getting paid but dont seem to care about the animals!!


----------



## Tigerneko (Jan 2, 2009)

Double trouble said:


> Just out of intrest would someone who knows please confirm for me who actually makes the decision of which animals are euthanized, and how are these chosen!
> Thanks in advance
> regards
> DT
> ...


I'm not 100% but I think it's the centre managers.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

Double trouble said:


> Just out of intrest would someone who knows please confirm for me who actually makes the decision of which animals are euthanized, and how are these chosen!
> Thanks in advance
> regards
> DT
> ...


From reading about the recent case regarding the 10 GSD's the inspectors make the decision.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Thanks for your replies.

I do understand where some of you are coming from when you explain the situations that have happened with you and the R.S.P.C.A.

But for those who don't support them.............what about if everyone thought like that? Where would animal welfare be then?

You don't want to support them.....but therefore you don't want to support the poor innocent animals in their care then.

I don't have dealings with them, obviously, but i still feel that on here they are slanted too much. 

In my opinion they are trying to do all they can. They want to help all these animals but its impossible sometimes.

Its not just the R.S.P.C.A that sometimes fails animals and society. 

Its completely different but our G.S.P.C.A are amazing. They will always come out. I have phoned up many times about small animals like birds etc and they will always come and collect them. They don't PTS healthy animals at all. But we don't have the problems that the UK have.
Our shelter has even had wild animals! Seals, monkeys and even 2 lion cubs! They were quarantined here before going to a South Africa nature reserve. Soo cute!


----------



## Miss.PuddyCat (Jul 13, 2009)

I just saw a commercail for the a.s.p.c.a??

anyways it just showed animals (cats and dogs) but I would be interested in seeing how these rescues actually help these animals?

Ive seen one good rescue video on how they helped the dogs they took on.


----------



## Cat_Crazy (Jul 15, 2009)

Double trouble said:


> Just out of intrest would someone who knows please confirm for me who actually makes the decision of which animals are euthanized, and how are these chosen!
> Thanks in advance
> regards
> DT
> ...


At my branch the ONLY reason we ever put to sleep an animal is when it is in the absolute best interest of the animal at question, as recomended by a vet.

So if an animal is suffering and un-able to be treated and the vet says that the only option is to put the animal to sleep then we will do so.

We will not put any animal to sleep for any other reason!

We have had aggressive dogs in the past and spent thousands on behaviourist to combat this rather then putting to sleep.

We also recently spent just short of 800 pounds treating one poor cat that came into us.

We do not put to sleep for silly reasons and do our best by all the animals in our care.


----------



## Cat_Crazy (Jul 15, 2009)

Verbatim said:


> I'm not 100% but I think it's the centre managers.


We do not put to sleep unless a vet recomends so we go by that however I know at other branches they sometimes put to sleep due to lack of space, aggression etc. and if this is the case then 3 people have to agree to the decission for it to be allowed.

Most branches however have a no kill policy which means if we have aggression we deal with it, if treatment will be expensive we raise the money and if an animal stays with us for months on end looking for a home then so be it.

We are committed to the animals in our care the entire time they are with us.

Look at our website if you want some more information on how we are run.

RSPCA Macclesfield SE Cheshire & Buxton Branch


----------



## oldDoubletrouble (Sep 21, 2009)

Cat_Crazy said:


> At my branch the ONLY reason we ever put to sleep an animal is when it is in the absolute best interest of the animal at question, as recomended by a vet.
> 
> So if an animal is suffering and un-able to be treated and the vet says that the only option is to put the animal to sleep then we will do so.
> 
> ...


Thank you for that encouraging information. I asked because there was a programme on TV this morning wherebt the RSPCA officer took 15 cats in! They were all badly breed with eye infections, fleas etc! It seemed that 'she' the officer and her alone made the decision to have the cats euthanized! Maybe I go the wrong end of the stick. Anyway! Thank you again and would look forward to any other members accounts, if there are any, Then I shall tell you why I asked.
regards
DT


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

bassetsandbeyond said:


> Most people that judge shows said because of the "pedigree dogs exposed" most dog breeders are not donating to the rspca and instead to dogstrust, KC and own Breed rescues etc. I still yet to find out why????


As one of the breeders who has stopped donating to the RSPCA after that program, I'll explain why. The RSPCA was quite happy to take an annual donation from the Kennel Club, and was quite happy for the Kennel Club to sponsor companionship dogs shows that raised money for them - yet at the same time their chief vet went on PDE and spoke a lot of rubbish - the phrase I can remember being most angry about is that a pedigree dog show is nothing but a parade of mutants.

So, if they think my beautiful border collies and bergamaschi are mutants, then there's no way they're getting any money from me. I'm now donating my hard earned cash to organisations such as the Blue Cross and the AHT, who are actively working for animal health.

Of course, I can't speak for every breeder/exhibitor, but a lot of breeders/exhibitors I know feel exactly the same, and have changed their donations accordingly.


----------



## Cat_Crazy (Jul 15, 2009)

Double trouble said:


> Thank you for that encouraging information. I asked because there was a programme on TV this morning wherebt the RSPCA officer took 15 cats in! They were all badly breed with eye infections, fleas etc! It seemed that 'she' the officer and her alone made the decision to have the cats euthanized! Maybe I go the wrong end of the stick. Anyway! Thank you again and would look forward to any other members accounts, if there are any, Then I shall tell you why I asked.
> regards
> DT


What you mention is a different situation.

The inspectors who deal with these cases are paid staff working for the national RSPCA. They deal with reports of cruelty etc. and will then send any animals collected onto the local branches for us to re-home.

The inspectors ARE allowed to euthanise on scene if they feel it is nessacery, without anyone else agreeing, which I must admit I feel is wrong as one person's opinion completly differs from anothers.

The only reasons they should be euthanising is to prevent undue suffering but this is sadly not always the case.

As a branch we have our own inspectors although we call them animal collection officers.

We have no rights to take animals from people if they are neglected that is a job for the national inspectors but if an animal is abandoned, signed over, owner died etc. we have our volunteers who go and assess the situation before bringing the animal in.

These people have no right to euthanise, they collect the animal and take it to the nearest vet for any treatment and procedures that need doing.

I don't believe the decission to put to sleep should be made by one person no matter who that person is.


----------



## Cat_Crazy (Jul 15, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> As one of the breeders who has stopped donating to the RSPCA after that program, I'll explain why. The RSPCA was quite happy to take an annual donation from the Kennel Club, and was quite happy for the Kennel Club to sponsor companionship dogs shows that raised money for them - yet at the same time their chief vet went on PDE and spoke a lot of rubbish - the phrase I can remember being most angry about is that a pedigree dog show is nothing but a parade of mutants.
> 
> So, if they think my beautiful border collies and bergamaschi are mutants, then there's no way they're getting any money from me. I'm now donating my hard earned cash to organisations such as the Blue Cross and the AHT, who are actively working for animal health.
> 
> Of course, I can't speak for every breeder/exhibitor, but a lot of breeders/exhibitors I know feel exactly the same, and have changed their donations accordingly.


I did not see this program but I agree it would make me angry, I am a huge fan of pedigree dogs and cats and while I have a soft spot for my mixed breed I feel there is always room in this world for pedigree's and applaud the breeders working for healthier dogs.

However like I have said in a previous post, please do not condem the small RSPCA branches for the actions of the national society, it makes it hard for us having to live with thier bad reputation.

Why don't you look up your local RSPCA branch and donate direct to them instead?

I always urge people to donate to branches rather than the national society as the money is put to much better use and goes directly towards the cost of caring for the animals.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

I have only ever rang the r.s.p.c.a once when we wanted to rehome a very difficult dog to say the least, literally rang all the rescue centres but when i told them why they could not take him but was very helpful and did try other avenues for us, i rang the r.s.p.c.a told them my predicument and they said they couldnt just come take a dog from me just because of his temperement then said "but if you took him far enough from home that he couldnt find his way back, then rang them they would pick him up as a stray", i was absolutely appauled at this as if i could just take this dog who we had, had from 4 weeks old was now 7 months and despite the hell he had caused we was attached to him, they had no thought at all for him being run over, getting into wrong hands from the time we abandoned him to them going to pick him up. Never, ever will i ever support the r.s.p.c.a.


----------



## dexter (Nov 29, 2008)

as a breeder/shower i'll never donate a penny more to them........................bet they're well down on donations now.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Cat_Crazy said:


> I did not see this program but I agree it would make me angry, I am a huge fan of pedigree dogs and cats and while I have a soft spot for my mixed breed I feel there is always room in this world for pedigree's and applaud the breeders working for healthier dogs.
> 
> However like I have said in a previous post, please do not condem the small RSPCA branches for the actions of the national society, it makes it hard for us having to live with thier bad reputation.
> 
> ...


I understand what you are saying, but unfortunately I am not all that impressed with the actions of my local shelter. I have reported things to them that they haven't even bothered investigating - one was an old dog that was kept tethered on a short lead in a garden with no shelter, was out 24/7 in all weathers (including snow!) - no-one even visited to check it out and the poor old dog died after months of laying there tethered to the short lead. There is no way I will donate money to an organisation as uncaring as that.

I can appreciate that not all local branches are like this, but I really feel that if they are as desperate for money as they are claiming then the opulent and wealthy National Society should spend its money helping out these branches rather than playing at politics and paying a chief vet to do nothing other than spout forth rubbish on tv programs. There seems to be something corrupt in a charity that takes donations from the public (who think they are donating their money to help animals) and then instead uses it to furnish wonderful head offices and pay vets to appear on tv programs.

Perhaps there ought to be a panorama investigation into just what does happen to all the money the national society receives, and why it isn't spent on helping animals.



dexter said:


> as a breeder/shower i'll never donate a penny more to them........................bet they're well down on donations now.


I agree totally. Quite apart from all the breeder/exhibitors who are now donating to more worthy charities, they will be missing the regular donation from the Kennel Club, and also the donations from the hundreds of companion shows up and down the country. And, of course, think of all the money they would have received in donations from visitors at Crufts. Withdrawing from Crufts was a ridiculous move for the RSPCA - if they truly believed what their chief vet was saying on PDE shouldn't they have been there to prosecute all the breeders/exhibitors who are forcing their crippled mutants to run round show rings when they are clearly ill and unhealthy?  Any charity who can willingly give up all the money visitors at Crufts would have donated clearly has no thought of the animals in need of rescue that all that money would help - but then, from what the people on here who work in the shelters are saying, it seems as though that money wouldn't have got to the shelters to help the animals in any case.


----------



## JoWDC (Jan 11, 2009)

I haven't (thankfully) had cause to contact the RSPCA to report an animal in distress, but i want to put a positive slant on this thread.

Last year we adopted our two from our local branch. At the time one of the cat wing's had cat flu, for which all those affected were having treatment. They were also doing everything they could not to pass this round to the unaffected cats, to the point of not doing home visits for fear of spreading the disease & forgoing the home visits (but still doing the interview) in order to minimize the risks to the cats.

There was one cat in there which had heart problems - an beautiful 2 year old called Della. A few people were enquiring about her, but were put off by the medical issue. When we picked ours up, we heard that she had been reserved by a Veterinary Nurse who would know how to look after her - so a very happy ending here.

Our two were 6 1/2 years old when we got them, so over the normal cuteness age that people usually look for, however our lives have been changed completely, for the better. I would add that *all* the cat pens were full (with either two cats or three/ four kittens) at the time we visited.

Personally, I am grateful for the work they do and for allowing my life to be enriched, and am also very tempted to go back to the branch and give them a donation.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

HighPr00 said:


> I guess you've never had to ring them and ask for help regards an act of cruelty or neglect?


I know where you are coming from I've had to deal with them myself and they are a complete waste of time. 
They look good on the telly, be that's about it.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Happy Paws said:


> I know where you are coming from I've had to deal with them myself and they are a complete waste of time.
> They look good on the telly, be that's about it.


Yes exactly look good on telly, at prime time as well wonder how much those adverts cost them, all the time pleading poverty.


----------



## owieprone (Nov 6, 2008)

how else will they raise awareness without putting ads on when the MOST amount of people will be watching? no point wasting money putting the ads on when a minority of people (those out of work for instance with no extra income for giving away) will be watching.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

owieprone said:


> how else will they raise awareness without putting ads on when the MOST amount of people will be watching? no point wasting money putting the ads on when a minority of people (those out of work for instance with no extra income for giving away) will be watching.


Suppose so ure quite right, just annoys me so much that they can spend so much on getting in money, when local rescues struggle as they do and dont turn down the animals they do. As you can see by my previous post some where on this thread ive no time for them.


----------



## owieprone (Nov 6, 2008)

yep but the local ones often have a larger support base than the big country wide sanctuarys. people who run themwill have mates of mates who'll be looking or can help out.. needs less money to run and are willing to sacrifice more.

larger charities have larger overheads as they're not working from home etc.

i still prefer small charities for the people who run them are less 'icy' and far nicer than most larger charities (they're usually slightly deranged which always helps me like them more lol)


----------



## Laureng05 (Oct 2, 2009)

Verbatim said:


> I'm not 100% but I think it's the centre managers.


the insectors ring their centre and they usually decide, the vet will tell them what is best for the animal and either they decide or they run it past their centre x


----------



## princessx87 (Feb 26, 2009)

I have had a few experiences with the RSPCA and now I wouldnt touch them with a barge pole!


1) When I was looking for dogs for sale, I cam across a staffy breeder about 30 minutes from where my partner lived. At the time me & OH was working so my mum went to see the pups!

My mum as normal got lost, So we ended up going back together. Once there it was clear that this was a BAD breeder, Anyway we continued to look at the dogs.
There was on puppy with its mother, The mother was so over bred that she couldnt stand (Back legs to weak) and the pup has no fur, Was terrified to move and shaking! Anyway I left a £20 deposit and told her I was coming to collect the pup the next day!

When I got home that evening I called the police & RSPCA. To which I was told
 If the animals had shelter, food & water thats not abuse or neglect 

In the end I had to go back and buy this puppy. On our way home we called into our emergency vets. (This was after 10pm!)

Our vet was so angry, He too called the rescue to tell them hes findings. Again he heard the same thing as me a few hours before.
Nothing ever happened, And I dread to think now how the bitch is!

2) My mum rescued two kittens 3 weeks old from our local rescue. They said that my mum could have them from 5 weeks, After the RSPCA done checks.
No checks was ever done. 2 weeks after being told this, There was a knock on the door and it was a inspector saying that all checks was cleared and handed the kittens over!?? She was told to contact them when the kittens was 4 months old and they would give her a spaying voucher! To this day never once has she heard from them, The vets wouldnt spay them until it was cleared from the rescue. The vet had to call them 3 times before he was told they had no record of ever having our cats!?
In the end the vet / RSPCA worker cleared to have them done at the age of 4 years!

3) The last few months we have had the neighbour from hell! He brought a American pit bull, He belts this dog so hard it cries all the time! For a time this dog was so friendly, Calm and loving, Now its aggressive and fearful!

Again we get the same old rubbish excuse 
 if it has shelter, food & water, then we cannot come out! Even when the dog is illegal they just dont want to know!

Now I think anyone can understand why I wouldnt give them the time or day!
Yet all the smaller rescues I work with, Have tried to step in although none of them get government help, They pull their weight!


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I'm sure I read somewhere that, the RSPCA are one of the richest charities in this country.


----------



## Guest (Oct 3, 2009)

Happy Paws said:


> I'm sure I read somewhere that, the RSPCA are one of the richest charities in this country.


Yes they are multi millionaires


----------



## rebenda (Jan 1, 2009)

Make it sound like the staff are rolling in it... some people havent got a clue


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Regardless what people think......i still stand by my beliefs that with such a negative attitude the R.S.P.C.A will get no-where towards better.

I will stand by them.....if for nothing else but the fact that DO actually care for animals....i will not ''disown'' them because i care that much about animals that i will support any charity that tries to do their best. 

If not money direct to the centre's then try and help with the supplies they need. Even vouchers for a pet centre so they can get supplies themselves.

I am still also shocked that people on here....a pet forum....a true animal lover forum....can still say some things they say.

Whatever people think about the charity.......at least think of the poor animals in their care, and the 1000's they rescue......

For all of those that hate them.....do you know where all the animals in their care daily and the rescues that come daily would go if we all had the same attitude and decided not to do anything for them and the charity folds? 

As i have said before i understand how upsetting and frustrating it is for those who have had bad dealings with them.....but even after 1 bad dealing you have decided they are not worth it? Baffling...........many a shelter have bad dealing/failures etc but yet people pick on the R.S.P.C.A.

Remember just how many are employed by them......you might have had bad dealings with one or two..............but i feel your not looking at it as a whole

The actual charity is doing all its can....ok H/O might well be in ''luxuary'' but they wouldn't be for long if we all encouraged people to give to the centres...........phone and ask what they need and then help that way....get vouchers etc etc........rather than dump them all together.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> Regardless what people think......i still stand by my beliefs that with such a negative attitude the R.S.P.C.A will get no-where towards better.
> 
> I will stand by them.....if for nothing else but the fact that DO actually care for animals....i will not ''disown'' them because i care that much about animals that i will support any charity that tries to do their best.
> 
> ...


For all i have said about them i have only ever had 1 dealing with them the rest is on hear say and t.b.h i dont actually go on hear say whatever the subject, so having read this post i have to agree.


----------



## Guest (Oct 3, 2009)

rebenda said:


> Make it sound like the staff are rolling in it... some people havent got a clue


No not the staff but the organization


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

rona said:


> No not the staff but the organization


That can't be that rich or the animals in their care wouldn't need so much help.

I don't know how wealthy charities are.......so the R.S.P.C.A might well be in the animal charity world. But then they are the biggest so it depends on the ratio that the money is counted............

But at the end of the day they are still a charity that help many 1000's of animals so in my opinion does not derserve all the slack they get.


----------



## rebenda (Jan 1, 2009)

They are only the 'biggest animal charity' because of the work the staff have done would they still be doing the job now if they were that bad!


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> Regardless what people think......i still stand by my beliefs that with such a negative attitude the R.S.P.C.A will get no-where towards better.
> 
> I will stand by them.....if for nothing else but the fact that DO actually care for animals....i will not ''disown'' them because i care that much about animals that i will support any charity that tries to do their best.
> 
> ...


Instead of being shocked and berating people on here for not caring about animals because they prefer not to support the RSPCA, perhaps you ought to be shocked and berate the RSPCA itself. This is a charity that is supposed to care about animals. It has millions of pounds stashed away in bank accounts. Millions of pounds that could be given to the shelters to look after the animals in their care, to pay for staff to look after them. Until it has done that, my hard-earned spare money is going to go to charities who genuinely don't have much money, charities that do as much, if not more, than the RSPCA to rescue and care for animals. Doing that does not mean that I don't care about animals. It means I have the sense to give my limited amount of spare money to charities who genuinely don't have cash stashed away.

As I have posted before, I think a public enquiry into this charity and the way it manages its funds is long overdue.


----------



## HighPr00 (Aug 9, 2009)

rona said:


> Yes they are multi millionaires


Yet the majority of their centres are self-funded, they get no monetary help from the main organisation.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Spellweaver said:


> Instead of being shocked and berating people on here for not caring about animals because they prefer not to support the RSPCA, perhaps you ought to be shocked and berate the RSPCA itself. This is a charity that is supposed to care about animals. It has millions of pounds stashed away in bank accounts. Millions of pounds that could be given to the shelters to look after the animals in their care, to pay for staff to look after them. Until it has done that, my hard-earned spare money is going to go to charities who genuinely don't have much money, charities that do as much, if not more, than the RSPCA to rescue and care for animals. Doing that does not mean that I don't care about animals. It means I have the sense to give my limited amount of spare money to charities who genuinely don't have cash stashed away.
> 
> As I have posted before, I think a public enquiry into this charity and the way it manages its funds is long overdue.


I have never said people don't care about animals on here.............that was a bit harsh.

I stated i cared...me.... it was all about my feeling and thoughts....i was not talking about anyone else on here. I am sorry you took it that way, but if i wanted to put those who didn't support didn't care then i would have done simply. Not insinuated it.

If there is solid proof of their so called millions then i might have a re-think until then i will continue to believe in them and (most) their work.
It is easy for all the rumours of their millions....but then anyone could start one about another charity.


----------



## Guest (Oct 3, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> Instead of being shocked and berating people on here for not caring about animals because they prefer not to support the RSPCA, perhaps you ought to be shocked and berate the RSPCA itself. This is a charity that is supposed to care about animals. It has millions of pounds stashed away in bank accounts. Millions of pounds that could be given to the shelters to look after the animals in their care, to pay for staff to look after them. Until it has done that, my hard-earned spare money is going to go to charities who genuinely don't have much money, charities that do as much, if not more, than the RSPCA to rescue and care for animals. Doing that does not mean that I don't care about animals. It means I have the sense to give my limited amount of spare money to charities who genuinely don't have cash stashed away.
> 
> As I have posted before, I think a public enquiry into this charity and the way it manages its funds is long overdue.


Excellent post, I agree.

I won't be giving anything to the RSPCA,not a penny.
I care about animals,maybe it's about time the RSPCA did the same thing.

We were told whilst looking after an hedgehog that if we handed him into there care it would be pts as they don't know how to care for wildlife appropriatly.

I donate to my breed rescue and that's the way it will stay.


----------



## HighPr00 (Aug 9, 2009)

Charity Commision - ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS - Charity overview


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

sallyanne said:


> Excellent post, I agree.
> 
> I won't be giving anything to the RSPCA,not a penny.
> I care about animals,maybe it's about time the RSPCA did the same thing.
> ...


I never said that those who dislike the R.S.P.C.A do not care about animals.

People have read my post out of context 

I thought you and Spellweaver would have known that i never meant that 

Especially you two.....i know how much you both care......i agree with pretty much all the posts you two put. I was speaking from my point...i am not in any position whatsoever to talk for anyone else.

I highly respect that you donate to your breed rescue. And funnily enough i respect all opinions. But as with anything i also have an opinion it just happens that it differs from yours.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> I have never said people don't care about animals on here.............that was a bit harsh.
> 
> I stated i cared...me.... it was all about my feeling and thoughts....i was not talking about anyone else on here. I am sorry you took it that way, but if i wanted to put those who didn't support didn't care then i would have done simply. Not insinuated it.


What you actually wrote was:



Acacia86 said:


> I am still also shocked that people on here....a pet forum....a true animal lover forum....can still say some things they say.


I apologise if you did not mean that you were shocked that people on here didn't care about animals, but that was what it seemed to me that you were saying.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Spellweaver said:


> What you actually wrote was:
> 
> I apologise if you did not mean that you were shocked that people on here didn't care about animals, but that was what it seemed to me that you were saying.


Sorry i forgot in my post to you to say that yes i was shocked with what some people said........but i certainly did not say or mean they didn't care about animals.

Most people on here care so much about animals like myself.......some even outstand me on their care about them! Which is shocking in itself and they deserve massive gold medals and more!! (buy that i mean...i thought it wasn't possible to care anymore than i do, but certain people on here have done it! And i love to learn especially by people like them)
I guess i am just passionate about organisation that cares for animals. I am also naive to it.. in the UK....i am not afraid to admit it either. Over here animal care and welfare is different. We do not have the problems the UK suffers........thats not to say we don't have some heart-breaking occassions but our G.S.P.C.A are amazing.

All i was trying to do is say how i feel..........i understand i might have come across differently but thats all i was trying to do. :blushing:


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

HighPr00 said:


> Charity Commision - ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS - Charity overview


Thanks for this HighPr00. Very interesting report that supports what people on here were saying about the wealth of the chairty.

Own use assets (whatever that means!) £83 million
other assets £28 million
Investments £123 million

I make that a cool £234 million pounds!!!!!

And they didn't spend £3 million of the donations they received that year - adding to their own use assets, one presumes!

Now I'm not saying that they should sell all their assets and investments - but with £234 million to play with the interest alone should keep quite a few shelters in business!


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> Sorry i forgot in my post to you to say that yes i was shocked with what some people said........but i certainly did not say or mean they didn't care about animals.
> 
> Most people on here care so much about animals like myself.......some even outstand me on their care about them! Which is shocking in itself and they deserve massive gold medals and more!!
> 
> ...


And you are entitled to your opinion hun - I understand what you meant now. Sorry if I seemed harsh before.


----------



## Colsy (Oct 3, 2008)

I used to think the RSPCA was ok..still is to a point.
But i have had some dealings with them in the past when i found various dogs and other animals they were not at all helpful.
I actually prefer to support many smaller animal charities.
Only my view sorry if it offends anyone.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Spellweaver said:


> And you are entitled to your opinion hun - I understand what you meant now. Sorry if I seemed harsh before.


Thank you. I do understand my opinion can be very naive as i don't have to 'deal' with them because in Guernsey we have our own. But i still stand by my beliefs. 
You were just putting your point across....which i do respect. I have read each post throughly and although i know that they have failed it is shocking to hear just from here the amount of times.
But if we all had a positive appproach maybe things would be different.
x



Colsy said:


> I used to think the RSPCA was ok..still is to a point.
> But i have had some dealings with them in the past when i found various dogs and other animals they were not at all helpful.
> I actually prefer to support many smaller animal charities.
> Only my view sorry if it offends anyone.


Good on you to support them! Please don't feel you'll offend me so to speak.....i have my opinions you have yours.

But with more positive attitude i think they could and would better themselves...........well the actual centres anyway.


----------



## HighPr00 (Aug 9, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> If there is solid proof of their so called millions then i might have a re-think until then i will continue to believe in them and (most) their work.
> It is easy for all the rumours of their millions....but then anyone could start one about another charity.





HighPr00 said:


> Charity Commision - ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS - Charity overview


Re-thinking yet?


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

HighPr00 said:


> Re-thinking yet?


I am actually quite shocked......

Even with that........i still stand by my beliefs.....meaning i don't like to wonder what the 10000's of animals would do without them 

Maybe thats the sad fact...............

I still would donate items they need. As i have said, maybe not think of them but the animals in their care. They still deserve the upmost care.

P.S I don't mean anyone else! This is my feelings.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> I am actually quite shocked......
> 
> Even with that........i still stand by my beliefs.....meaning i don't like to wonder what the 10000's of animals would do without them
> 
> ...


I am completely with you on this one..... 

Agree with everything you said above!


----------



## Colsy (Oct 3, 2008)

I think every charity is good as long as it helps the animals and not line their own pockets.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Colsy said:


> I think every charity is good as long as it helps the animals and not line their own pockets.


But we can stop this.

By donating (if we want to) items/food they need, vouchers for pet stores/vets (if they do it) etc etc rather than send money direct debit/cheque etc to H/O.

That way we are supporting the animals not the organisation so to speak.


----------



## Colsy (Oct 3, 2008)

Acacia86 said:


> But we can stop this.
> 
> By donating (if we want to) items/food they need, vouchers for pet stores/vets (if they do it) etc etc rather than send money direct debit/cheque etc to H/O.
> 
> That way we are supporting the animals not the organisation so to speak.


Good point and a very good idea too.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> But we can stop this.
> 
> By donating (if we want to) items/food they need, vouchers for pet stores/vets (if they do it) etc etc rather than send money direct debit/cheque etc to H/O.
> 
> That way we are supporting the animals not the organisation so to speak.


I understand what you mean - but a better scenario would be to donate such stuff to charities that didn't have all those millions stashed away, and make the RSPCA spend some of its millions on its shelters. Then an even wider pool of animals would be rescued, cared for and looked after ...... just a thought!


----------



## Colsy (Oct 3, 2008)

We have just raised alot of money for Many Tears by doing a sponsored walk.
Small charities are always in need of help.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> I understand what you mean - but a better scenario would be to donate such stuff to charities that didn't have all those millions stashed away, and make the RSPCA spend some of its millions on its shelters. Then an even wider pool of animals would be rescued, cared for and looked after ...... just a thought!


People make the arguement time and again on the 'millions' they have stashed away!!!!! 

Overheads, wages, fuel, vehicles, vets bills, food, materials, office materials etc etc the list goes on.... Their outgoings are millions each month nationally...

Do you keep money in the bank to cover your direct debits? Of course you do, they are no different.

And it is wise practice to have a nest egg for when times get hard. Which judging by this thread there will be sadly very soon.

If they went bust and didn't have any bank reserves (millions in the bank) people would say they didn't managed their money correctly.....

They can't win any which way!


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> People make the arguement time and again on the 'millions' they have stashed away!!!!!
> 
> Overheads, wages, fuel, vehicles, vets bills, food, materials, office materials etc etc the list goes on.... Their outgoings are millions each month nationally...
> 
> ...


But with assets of £234 million they would have enough from the interest to do all that and donate money to many, if not all, of their shelters. There's having a nest egg, and then there's greed - and this smacks of greed to me. And anyway, even if they did feel the need to keep a £234 million nest egg (plus all the yearly interest on that) for a rainy day, there's still no excuse for not spending £3 million of donations on the animals. You can see where they got the £234 million in the first place, can't you? By taking money people have donated in the belief that it will help animals in need. That's tantamount to stealing, imo.


----------



## Colsy (Oct 3, 2008)

I was just looking at their RSPCA Head Office wow thats well expensive.
Shame the smaller charities have not got big offices like that one.
Perhaps they could all help each other,after all we are all animal lovers.
Share and share alike.
It would make the world a much better place.
Dont you think ?


----------



## GSDlover4ever (Feb 21, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> But we can stop this.
> 
> By donating (if we want to) items/food they need, vouchers for pet stores/vets (if they do it) etc etc rather than send money direct debit/cheque etc to H/O.
> 
> That way we are supporting the animals not the organisation so to speak.


with the SSPCA i was at whilst doing work experience!

there was a room at the rescue centre - filled with dog food and treats. it was like an over filled pet shop. the staff in there said to me when i asked what happenes to all of this food that has been donated - there response was that it stays here until it is out of date!

i asked why - they said the majority of the animals here are unable to get any of these treats as it will upset there tummy.

the head man of that rescue was quite strict and the people that worked there weren't allowed to take food out without permission - they had to write everything down that they took out etc....

whilst i was there as well - i was the one who was told to bin a lot of the towels that were donated. 
a staff member said it was because they had to many - and people would donate to them anyway.

some of the towels were new - a few of them had tags on!

sadlya family member passed away when i was working there, i decided to take in a huge box of towels, covers etc.... tot he rescue. i never seen that box or the items in it again!

a friend of mine was also doing work experience at another SSPCA centre and she witnessed the staff haveing a load of dog meat that was donate - the staff took the dog meat that they wanted for there own animals and teh rest was chucked in a skip! 

personally i thought it would have been a better idea to give these items to other rescues or possibly ask for a donation from the public if they wanted to buy any of the items - especially if they addopted an animal from there!

so overall i would prefer to once again to donate to smaller charites that actually appreciate the good they receive!


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> But with assets of £234 million they would have enough from the interest to do all that and donate money to many, if not all, of their shelters. There's having a nest egg, and then there's greed - and this smacks of greed to me. And anyway, even if they did feel the need to keep a £234 million nest egg (plus all the yearly interest on that) for a rainy day, there's still no excuse for not spending £3 million of donations on the animals. You can see where they got the £234 million in the first place, can't you? By taking money people have donated in the belief that it will help animals in need. That's tantamount to stealing, imo.


Ok.... If their outgongs are around a million a month... £234 million worth of assets isn't gonna last long if donations shrunk dramatically. To us people thats alot of money, but with the outgoings/ expenses the RSPCA have, its actually not a huge amount to have in reserve.

And not all the donations that people make go into the nest egg, the lions share does indeed go to the animals and shelters, as well as the overheads I have mentioned earlier.

Have you read all the thread?

I can see how people like yourself come to these opinions about the RSPCA. But there is a bigger picture, which was discussed earlier in the thread.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

Spellweaver said:


> I understand what you mean - but a better scenario would be to donate such stuff to charities that didn't have all those millions stashed away, and make the RSPCA spend some of its millions on its shelters. Then an even wider pool of animals would be rescued, cared for and looked after ...... just a thought!


A thought.. well.....thought of! xx

I do understand where you coming from, i will and do donate to various charities. Animals, children and 'third world' (i am not to keen on that term i prefer 'those less fortunate' term).



Colsy said:


> We have just raised alot of money for Many Tears by doing a sponsored walk.
> Small charities are always in need of help.


I know. I really do respect what you have done....as you know.



tillysdream said:


> People make the arguement time and again on the 'millions' they have stashed away!!!!!
> 
> Overheads, wages, fuel, vehicles, vets bills, food, materials, office materials etc etc the list goes on.... Their outgoings are millions each month nationally...
> 
> ...


Great post..................i know a bit different but i find it much easier to save a bit of money for :

1: Bills

2. Anything urgent i might not have upfront cash for

Yet if i was on ahuge scale i can imagine their ''savings'' would be huge


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Colsy said:


> I was just looking at their RSPCA Head Office wow thats well expensive.
> Shame the smaller charities have not got big offices like that one.
> Perhaps they could all help each other,after all we are all animal lovers.
> Share and share alike.
> ...


The Head Office has to be fit for office staff to work in ie. health and safety, working conditions etc etc.

Would you want the office staff/admin work from a garden shed with no computers?

What centuary are we living in?


----------



## HighPr00 (Aug 9, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> Overheads, wages, fuel, vehicles, vets bills, food, materials, office materials etc etc the list goes on.... Their outgoings are millions each month nationally...


Bills are already accounted for. The £2.86million is retained *profit*.

They're making that level of profit and also spending millions on swanky new headquarters for their executives, meanwhile the majority of their centres struggle to stay afloat and recieve no central funding.

If you think that's an acceptable way for a charity to operate then fair enough, I don't.


----------



## Captain.Charisma (May 24, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> I agree, the RSPCA/SSPCA are judged harshly.
> 
> They have to work within the law, they can't just take peoples animals off them. There has to be a clear picture of neglect. I can understand members frustration, but we do not live in the a perfect world, and the RSPCA is not perfect!
> 
> ...


Great post couldnt agree more, some people like moaning for moaning sake. Ive give RSCPA credit, for all there hard work and what they stand for, in which they have done a lot for dealing with animal cruelty. So three cheers for all there hard work


----------



## Guest (Oct 4, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> I have never said people don't care about animals on here.............that was a bit harsh.
> 
> I stated i cared...me.... it was all about my feeling and thoughts....i was not talking about anyone else on here. I am sorry you took it that way, but if i wanted to put those who didn't support didn't care then i would have done simply. Not insinuated it.
> 
> ...


I had previously given a positive proof link to their millions in the form of their accounts, but obviously you were not interested enough to read it.
I do not work on hearsay


----------



## Colsy (Oct 3, 2008)

tillysdream said:


> The Head Office has to be fit for office staff to work in ie. health and safety, working conditions etc etc.
> 
> Would you want the office staff/admin work from a garden shed with no computers?
> 
> What centuary are we living in?


No but they do not need a state of the art building.
I know some rescue who have much less,and the money is well spent elsewhere.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

HighPr00 said:


> Bills are already accounted for. The £2.86million is retained *profit*.
> 
> They're making that level of profit and also spending millions on swanky new headquarters for their executives, meanwhile the majority of their centres struggle to stay afloat and recieve no central funding.
> 
> If you think that's an acceptable way for a charity to operate then fair enough, I don't.


All charities have a nest egg, its a MUST!!!! Its seems alot of money but not really for a huge organisation.If they didn't and disaster struck they may have to close FOREVER! Then what would happen to all the animals they help then...

Quick question to all the people that think the RSPCA are a waste of space......

Have you ever bred from you animals? Are all your animals spayed/neutered?? If the answer is yes you have breed from them, well you too are part of the problem. And its the RSPCA that pick up the pieces as well as the specific breed rescue charities...

Those in glass houses should not throw stones!


----------



## Dundee (Oct 20, 2008)

> All charities have a nest egg, its a MUST!!!! Its seems alot of money but not really for a huge organisation.If they didn't and disaster struck they may have to close FOREVER! Then what would happen to all the animals they help then...


This is true. I wasn't keen when they invested all that money in the new building, but any charity must have this kind of money in reserve. It may seem a lot of money to you and me, but for an organisation as large as the RSPCA it is not. It is an absolute necessity to ensure it's survival in hard times.



> Quick question to all the people that think the RSPCA are a waste of space......
> 
> Have you ever bred from you animals? Are all your animals spayed/neutered?? If the answer is yes you have breed from them, well you too are part of the problem. And its the RSPCA that pick up the pieces as well as the specific breed rescue charities...


While I can understand why people get upset when the RSPCA don't act as they would as an individual, there are many reasons for it. But mainly, they are greatly restricted by law, and they themselves have very little power to act in most cases.

What I don't understand is why people hold them responsible for so many ills. Perhaps it's an affliction of modern society that it's always someone else's job to pick up the pieces. The cases they deal with are not the RSPCA's fault, but the fault of owners and breeders.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

HighPr00 said:


> Bills are already accounted for. The £2.86million is retained *profit*.
> 
> They're making that level of profit and also spending millions on swanky new headquarters for their executives, meanwhile the majority of their centres struggle to stay afloat and recieve no central funding.
> 
> If you think that's an acceptable way for a charity to operate then fair enough, I don't.





Colsy said:


> No but they do not need a state of the art building.
> I know some rescue who have much less,and the money is well spent elsewhere.


I totally agree with the above two posts. It is unacceptable to me that a charity can a) keep almost £3 million of donations for animal care to add to their already vast assets of £234 million, b) Need such state of the art offices instead of a much less costly and still well equipped HQ which would meet all H&S standards and c) Need to spend so much money and need such a huge HQ merely to employ 1453 people



tillysdream said:


> I can see how people like yourself come to these opinions about the RSPCA. But there is a bigger picture, which was discussed earlier in the thread.


I have read all the thread, and there certainly is a bigger picture - but it is a picture that you are not seeing. You are seeing shelters struggling to cope with animals that need help, and want to support these shelters, which is commendable. But the bigger picture is that money that should go to help them, that has actually been donated by people who thought they were giving help to them, is being hived off to increase the already considerable and vastly more than adequate wealth of the RSPCA HQ.

Animals need help and the local shelters struggle to give it. Without these local shelters and people who donate to them, they would go under. Yet we are in a recession, and people will have less and less to be able to give to charities. The RSPCA has enough money to help all the local shelters, and to continue to help local shelters year in, year out, but it chooses instead to amass wealth and work in opulent offices. Donations from people to local shelters is a short-term solution that is going to dry up. The long term solution is for the government to step in and MAKE the RSPCA spend the money it receives in donations on the animals it is supposed to care for.

And THAT is the bigger picture.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Dundee said:


> This is true. I wasn't keen when they invested all that money in the new building, but any charity must have this kind of money in reserve. It may seem a lot of money to you and me, but for an organisation as large as the RSPCA it is not. It is an absolute necessity to ensure it's survival in hard times.
> 
> While I can understand why people get upset when the RSPCA don't act as they would as an individual, there are many reasons for it. But mainly, they are greatly restricted by law, and they themselves have very little power to act in most cases.
> 
> What I don't understand is why people hold them responsible for so many ills. Perhaps it's an affliction of modern society that it's always someone else's job to pick up the pieces. The cases they deal with are not the RSPCA's fault, but the fault of owners and breeders.


Brilliant post! 
Do you think the members here will listen....?
Sadly I don't think so.....
As I said in one of my earliest posts on this thread, its bad owners that are the problem, thus leaving RSPCA to pick up the pieces.

Again, one of my favorite sayings, yes I am gonna say it again....
If people stopped collecting/breeding pets like stamps the RSPCA's job would be alot easier, and that would mean less pts and more rescues able to happen.

How many of you are helping the RSPCA to lobby government to gain more powers? I am.....


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> How many of you are helping the RSPCA to lobby government to gain more powers? I am.....


Well I am certainly not. The thought of that load of money-grabbing clowns with more power is positively frightening!


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> I totally agree with the above two posts. It is unacceptable to me that a charity can a) keep almost £3 million of donations for animal care to add to their already vast assets of £234 million, b) Need such state of the art offices instead of a much less costly and still well equipped HQ which would meet all H&S standards and c) Need to spend so much money and need such a huge HQ merely to employ 1453 people
> 
> I have read all the thread, and there certainly is a bigger picture - but it is a picture that you are not seeing. You are seeing shelters struggling to cope with animals that need help, and want to support these shelters, which is commendable. But the bigger picture is that money that should go to help them, that has actually been donated by people who thought they were giving help to them, is being hived off to increase the already considerable and vastly more than adequate wealth of the RSPCA HQ.
> 
> ...


I would also like to see the rescue centres get more money from Head Office... 

I have said a few times on this thread that the way the RSPCA is run, is far from perfect.
And..... again.... These systems are currently being reviewed at Head Office as we speak! FACT.....
Also parliament is being lobbied by the RSPCA as we speak, the RSPCA wants help and more powers from Government  FACT!

Do a wee google search, I am sure it will be on there somewhere....


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Dundee said:


> This is true. I wasn't keen when they invested all that money in the new building, but any charity must have this kind of money in reserve. It may seem a lot of money to you and me, but for an organisation as large as the RSPCA it is not. It is an absolute necessity to ensure it's survival in hard times.


I would agree that every charity needs investment and a nest egg to cover hard times. But £234 million seems to be far too excessive. Other charities seem to be able to function on far less, with no threat of going under.

AHT:
Charity overview

PDSA:
Charity overview

DOGS TRUST:
Charity overview


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> Well I am certainly not. The thought of that load of money-grabbing clowns with more power is positively frightening!


Lol, my wording wasn't good..

More powers to rescue animals from cruelty, for at the moment their hands are tied by laws and regulations they must follow.

Smaller rescues like CP, don't always abide by the law and get away with it.

But the RSPCA just can't get away with that ( personally I wished they would sometimes).

Ok, another idea, our NHS hospitals make mistakes ALL the time, should government give them less money out of spite? No of course not, cos that would only make matters worse.... Less money, more mistakes, doesn't improve anything...


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> I would also like to see the rescue centres get more money from Head Office...
> 
> I have said a few times on this thread that the way the RSPCA is run, is far from perfect.
> And..... again.... These systems are currently being reviewed at Head Office as we speak! FACT.....
> ...


But while ever people struggle to help the local shelters struggle, instead of lobbying the government to make the RSPCA head office spend the money donated to them on the local shelters, the nothing will change. And I know the RSPCA is lobbying the government for more powers, but it until they get their house in order the thought of this organisation with more powers is frightening.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> I would agree that every charity needs investment and a nest egg to cover hard times. But £234 million seems to be far too excessive. Other charities seem to be able to function on far less, with no threat of going under.
> 
> AHT:
> Charity overview
> ...


But none of these charities are as big as the RSPCA, so don't need as much savings/investments....
So this arguement doesn't work.
And actually the PDSA financial way of working things is VERY similar to the RSPCA. They have alot invested in buildings, and nest eggs, but on a smaller scale, cos they are a smaller organisation.

I have worked for two main animal charities (mentioned on this thread) and a small independant rescue. At the sharp end, and then later at admin level. So, I know how it all works 

I am first to admit their failings, and yes there are many! But was just trying to educate (don't mean that in a condensending manner) that everything is not black and white. Shades of grey.... And the reasons why the RSPCA make the hard decisions that they do...


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> But none of these charities are as big as the RSPCA, so don't need as much savings/investments....
> So this arguement doesn't work.
> QUOTE]
> 
> Erm - yes it does. The RSPCA seems like a large organisation, but all funding for its many shelters is done at the local level. If you are looking at the work of the National Office in isolation, which is what the £234 million pounds refers to, then it is really a much smaller organistion than any of the other charities.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> But while ever people struggle to help the local shelters struggle, instead of lobbying the government to make the RSPCA head office spend the money donated to them on the local shelters, the nothing will change. And I know the RSPCA is lobbying the government for more powers, but it until they get their house in order the thought of this organisation with more powers is frightening.


And we all hope that things change for the better soon...

More powers to seize animal cruelty cases, neglect over breeding etc.

And that the internal review of how Head Office runs things which is also happening as we speak, will also help.

I just appeal to people not to stop donating, only the animals will suffer if funding becomes and issue. The big wigs at Head Office will still get paid their nice wages, and the cuts would probably would be made at the sharp end.... And do we all want that, as animals lovers?


----------



## Colsy (Oct 3, 2008)

It would be great if the RSPCA and the government spent more time trying to close down the Puppy Farms.
Now that would be money very well spent.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Colsy said:


> It would be great if the RSPCA and the government spent more time trying to close down the Puppy Farms.
> Now that would be money very well spent.


HERE! HERE!!!!


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I have had 2 experiences with the rspca.

A dog had been thrown out of a car on the main road, we tried to catch and could not, it was a round for a few days shop keepers were feeding it hoping to catch it, in the end one of them phone the rspca and told them what had happened, their answer was leave it a lone it will find it's own way home. They phoned a rescue centre, they were the in less than an hour caught the dog.

Watching 24/7 the other morning they said they would only leave a pet for 2 days before bring in the police. I don't think so.

A woman who lives in a flat up the road from us abandoned her dog in her flat. She had gone out as her neighbour's thought for the day. All that night and the next day and night the dog was crying and barking, the woman did not come back, the neighbours started to get worried and phoned the police in case she had, had an accident and the dog warden for advise about the dog and was told to phone the rspca.

1. They where told that no one could come out that day.

2. When they did turn up, they said they could not break in to the flat to get the dog (which we knew about) but to push dog biscuits thought the letter box, they came back the next day to see if she had come back which she hadn't, and said that if she was not back after *7 days *to let them know and they would get the police to help retrieve the dog. So the dog had no way of getting fresh water and was living on dry food the neighbourgs were pushing through the door. So that meant that the dog would be on it's own for more than a week. Five days later the woman returned, saying she had meet some friends and went away for a few days. What did the rspca say "don't leave it again for so long".

Words almost fail me except for the ones that would most likely to get me banded.:cursing::cursing::cursing::cursing: :mad5::mad5::mad5::mad5::mad5:


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> tillysdream said:
> 
> 
> > But none of these charities are as big as the RSPCA, so don't need as much savings/investments....
> ...


----------



## Guest (Oct 4, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> Quick question to all the people that think the RSPCA are a waste of space......
> 
> Have you ever bred from you animals? Are all your animals spayed/neutered?? If the answer is yes you have breed from them, well you too are part of the problem. And its the RSPCA that pick up the pieces as well as the specific breed rescue charities...


Would you care to elaborate on this ?


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Colsy said:


> It would be great if the RSPCA and the government spent more time trying to close down the Puppy Farms.
> Now that would be money very well spent.





haeveymolly said:


> HERE! HERE!!!!


Totally agree. Why don't they do this, I wonder?


----------



## JoWDC (Jan 11, 2009)

I did write a small essay on the RSPCA's accounts but then decided to delete it as it wasn't worth it.

HOWEVER i want to know, have you actually taken time out to look at the accounts for the year to 31 December 2007 (bet you didn't realise it was to that date) or are you just quoting from the front sheet just because thats the easy thing to do.

In order to understand the "quoted figures", you need to look at what's behind them, but i guess the majority of people wouldn't understand the Statement of Financial Activities or Balance Sheet anyway, or come to that any other part of the year end accounts anyway.

Its a national charity, FFS, which has been around for years - why the hell wouldn't it have money in the bank or have increases in property valuations that they probably bought years ago. I'm betting the other national charities which have been around the same length of time are in the same position but i don't see anybody is slating them on here.

Rant over.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

sallyanne said:


> Would you care to elaborate on this ?


It is what it is...... Think I have made my point 

Peace.

As I said ducking out of this thread


----------



## Guest (Oct 4, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> It is what it is...... Think I have made my point
> 
> Peace.
> 
> As I said ducking out of this thread


So in your opinion all those ethical breeder's are adding to the rescue crisis,likewise are those with entire dogs that have never been bred from and have responsible owners.

I have bred but not one of my dogs has gone through the rescue system,I own an entire male,it doesn't make me irresponsible.

The RSPCA or Breed Rescue won't be clearing up after me


----------



## Dundee (Oct 20, 2008)

> I would agree that every charity needs investment and a nest egg to cover hard times. But £234 million seems to be far too excessive. Other charities seem to be able to function on far less, with no threat of going under.


The other charities you mention are not as big as the RSPCA. With most public organisations there is waste, mismanagement of funds etc, and RSPCA is no different, but the reserves they have are not huge compared with thier outgoings.



> It would be great if the RSPCA and the government spent more time trying to close down the Puppy Farms.
> Now that would be money very well spent.


That is not in the RSPCA's remit. Breeders are governed by local government. And considering the attitude of the powers in the land was to give grants to farmers to 'diversify' into breeding puppies, I can't think that they will get involved. The laws as they stand aren't being enforced, so why would making more laws make a difference.

The RSPCA are far from perfect, but the general public puts responsibility on their shoulders for things they have no remit or power over.

The real cause of the problem is dog owners and breeders - it is those that should be targeted by the government, not placing the burden of irresponsible breeding and ownership on the RSPCA. The RSPCA is not a charity for neglected dogs and cats, it's care is for all animals including wild animals. If something was done about irresponsible ownership and breeding, all rescues, including the RSPCA would benefit.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Colsy said:


> It would be great if the RSPCA and the government spent more time trying to close down the Puppy Farms.
> Now that would be money very well spent.


A simplistic way of looking at things....
If people stopped buying them, that would be better!  Again, owners at fault here.

I for one agree with you, I would love that to happen also, would cheer the government on. x The RSPCA does close some of them down, but like drug dealers they just pop up elsewhere again. Where there is demand there are people selling/breeding.

People should act for themselves, and stop expecting governments, RSPCA to do everything.

Humans need to take a good look at themselves, before throwing stones at the people trying to help.


----------



## Dundee (Oct 20, 2008)

> I did write a small essay on the RSPCA's accounts but then decided to delete it as it wasn't worth it.
> 
> HOWEVER i want to know, have you actually taken time out to look at the accounts for the year to 31 December 2007 (bet you didn't realise it was to that date) or are you just quoting from the front sheet just because thats the easy thing to do.
> 
> ...


I agree.

I am indirectly involved in a charity that has assets of over £260 million. Annual outgoings are around £8 million. In the last 10 years, they have had a number of problems - loss of income from a government scheme, costs of refurbishing very old buildings (they were a health and safety nightmare), relaying of main gas supply on a 2 acre site... etc etc. They are now struggling. Yes, they could have paid for for all of that out of the £260 million (and they did have to dip into their assets), but the income generated from that £260 million is also income for the charity and necessary, so they now have a reduced income from that.

Running charities (or any organisation on this scale) is not like your local charity that exists from year to year (and I have a friend who runs a charity like that), in order to ensure the longevity of these organisations - and they have to think of years ahead, not just how to get through the next couple of years, these assets are absolutely necessary.


----------



## Colsy (Oct 3, 2008)

But if there was some law enforced by the government,the biggest animal charity (RSPCA) could help close these puppy farms down.
But i have not got much time for the government either look what the MP's get paid.
Also the police looked what happened to some police dogs a while back left in the car to die.
This world can be a sad place at times.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Deffo ducking out this time lol....

Door slamming firmly shut behind me 

Hopefully a few have taken on board what myself and others have said.


----------



## Dundee (Oct 20, 2008)

> But if there was some law enforced by the government,the biggest animal charity (RSPCA) could help close these puppy farms down.


Licensing of breeders is already dealt with by local government - and the requirements for being granted a licence and the conditions etc, vary from council to council. The council already has inspectors who deal with this... why would a charity get involved?

It is not what they are there for, neither, and more importantly, do I think it is the place for *any* charity to get involved in law enforcement (which is effectively what it would be).

Edited to add:

Can anyone think of any charity that is involved in enforcing the law?


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Dundee said:


> That is not in the RSPCA's remit. Breeders are governed by local government. And considering the attitude of the powers in the land was to give grants to farmers to 'diversify' into breeding puppies, I can't think that they will get involved. The laws as they stand aren't being enforced, so why would making more laws make a difference.
> 
> The RSPCA are far from perfect, but the general public puts responsibility on their shoulders for things they have no remit or power over.
> 
> The real cause of the problem is dog owners and breeders - it is those that should be targeted by the government, not placing the burden of irresponsible breeding and ownership on the RSPCA. The RSPCA is not a charity for neglected dogs and cats, it's care is for all animals including wild animals. If something was done about irresponsible ownership and breeding, all rescues, including the RSPCA would benefit.


I understand and agree with what you are saying about the problem of irresponsible ownership and breeding.

However, I don't understand your argument about it not being within the RSPCA's remit to do something aboout puppy farms. Dogs in these establishments are kept in terrible conditions and suffer greatly. Surely it is within the remit of the RSPCA to do something about that? What is the difference (except one of scale) between Joe Bloggs down the street who treats one dog badly and a puppy farm that treats several dogs badly? If one is within the remit of the RSPCA, isn't the other?


----------



## Dundee (Oct 20, 2008)

> However, I don't understand your argument about it not being within the RSPCA's remit to do something aboout puppy farms. Dogs in these establishments are kept in terrible conditions and suffer greatly. Surely it is within the remit of the RSPCA to do something about that? What is the difference (except one of scale) between Joe Bloggs down the street who treats one dog badly and a puppy farm that treats several dogs badly? If one is within the remit of the RSPCA, isn't the other?


Yes, of course, they can inspect, advise and help. What I meant was that enforcing the law (and they can only operate within the law), and the legal side is the remit of local government. This is the job of council inspectors and those that issue the licences.

Edited to add:

And why take (scarce) manpower and resources away from elsewhere to deal with puppy farmers when it should be local government doing it. They are the ones that issue licences and have the power to take them away.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Dundee said:


> Yes, of course, they can inspect, advise and help. What I meant was that enforcing the law (and they can only operate within the law), and the legal side is the remit of local government. This is the job of council inspectors and those that issue the licences.


Ah, thanks for clearing that up. I understand now - and I agree! 

I suppose what I meant by my original post re RSPCA and puppy farms was why don't they inspect, advise and help more often? I realise that the local council would have to bring any actual prosecution, but the RSPCA should have had a role in advising the local council of cruelty and neglect. Why don't we see cases of this happening? Is it becaue the RSPCA don't get involved? Or is it the local council who are reluctant to prosecute?

I truly don't know - ideas anyone?


----------



## Dundee (Oct 20, 2008)

> suppose what I meant by my original post re RSPCA and puppy farms was why don't they inspect, advise and help more often? I realise that the local council would have to bring any actual prosecution, but the RSPCA should have had a role in advising the local council of cruelty and neglect. Why don't we see cases of this happening? Is it becaue the RSPCA don't get involved? Or is it the local council who are reluctant to prosecute?


Sadly I think it's the latter. The local councils should have thier own inspectors who go in to inspect the 'licenced breeders' as well as issuing the licences. I'm not saying that the RSPCA shouldn't step in, but they are simply picking up a job that *should* be being done by the local councils, and in doing so, wasting resources which could be used elsewhere if the councils did do their job properly.


----------



## lauren001 (Jun 30, 2008)

tillysdream said:


> Humans need to take a good look at themselves, before throwing stones at the people trying to help.


I agree, I think many ordinary people who are very capable and who could help in a lot of animal problems in the community find it easier to just phone the already superstretched RSPCA, then moan when what they wanted to happen doesn't.

I don't like hearing about animals being PTS, but when there is absolutely no alternative what can they do.
They have their guidelines and are a big rumbling organisation.
I think if more people took it upon themselves to perhaps feed the stray cat or try and rehome it, perhaps look in on the elderly lady/single mother with her six dogs stuck in the house with no support, or phone a no-kill smaller rescue to deal with it. No point in saying after the event that "Mrs Jones" rescue down the road would have found homes for the kittens or would have been able to help the elderly lady with her dogs.
Rather than discharge any responsibility and merely phone the RSPCA, then perhaps people need to do a bit more for themselves.

This may free up the RSPCA to do work on real cruelty and spend their time on such things as puppy/kitten farmers, dog fights, badger baiting etc.

The last time I looked on one of those programmes some woman wanted the RSPCA inspector to take a pigeon out of her house, it had inadvertently flown in, another needed to get rid of some stray hens.
What a complete waste of resources.


----------



## Guest (Oct 4, 2009)

We tend to bypass the RSPCA,as in the case of the hedgehog we rescued,we contacted our vet who then contacted a proper carer who came and collected him.

The dealing's we have had with them haven't been great,yes they are busy,it must be a stressful job,however that is no excuse to be so downright rude and arrogant.


----------



## Guest (Oct 4, 2009)

I dont think highly of the RSPCA to be fair but i must say when i worked at the wildlife hospital i had dealings with our local one and they where great with the wildlife! If they had a call for an injured "wild" animals, they would let us know and if nearer would go out and get it for us and bring it to us! Many times this happened and late at night too..from birds to roe deers that have been invovled in a RTA! so i give them respect there


----------



## Cat_Crazy (Jul 15, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> Spellweaver said:
> 
> 
> > Head Office does give funds to the local shelters, as well as them raising their own. How do you think pays the electric, vets bils, the list goes on...
> ...


----------



## Cat_Crazy (Jul 15, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> But we can stop this.
> 
> By donating (if we want to) items/food they need, vouchers for pet stores/vets (if they do it) etc etc rather than send money direct debit/cheque etc to H/O.
> 
> That way we are supporting the animals not the organisation so to speak.


This can be stopped by donating to the LOCAL branches rather than the national RSPCA.


----------



## Guest (Oct 4, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> And we all hope that things change for the better soon...
> 
> More powers to seize animal cruelty cases, neglect over breeding etc.
> 
> ...





Dundee said:


> I agree.
> 
> I am indirectly involved in a charity that has assets of over £260 million. Annual outgoings are around £8 million. In the last 10 years, they have had a number of problems - loss of income from a government scheme, costs of refurbishing very old buildings (they were a health and safety nightmare), relaying of main gas supply on a 2 acre site... etc etc. They are now struggling. Yes, they could have paid for for all of that out of the £260 million (and they did have to dip into their assets), but the income generated from that £260 million is also income for the charity and necessary, so they now have a reduced income from that.
> 
> Running charities (or any organisation on this scale) is not like your local charity that exists from year to year (and I have a friend who runs a charity like that), in order to ensure the longevity of these organisations - and they have to think of years ahead, not just how to get through the next couple of years, these assets are absolutely necessary.


The R.S.P.C.A. national headquarters was moved to Horsham in 1973, now while I have no insight into the new headquarters, my father and a good friend were employed by the builders who refitted the previous headquarters before they moved in.
Can anyone tell me why they would have needed solid oak paneling and desks and some of most expensive carpets around at that time for the inner offices? 
Surely neither of these would have made any difference to the efficiency or H&S of the headquarters.
I'm sorry, but since being made aware of this in 1973, I have never and never will support the RSPCA headquarters


----------



## JoWDC (Jan 11, 2009)

rona said:


> The R.S.P.C.A. national headquarters was moved to Horsham in 1973, now while I have no insight into the new headquarters, my father and a good friend were employed by the builders who refitted the previous headquarters before they moved in.
> Can anyone tell me why they would have needed solid oak paneling and desks and some of most expensive carpets around at that time for the inner offices?
> Surely neither of these would have made any difference to the efficiency or H&S of the headquarters.
> I'm sorry, but since being made aware of this in 1973, I have never and never will support the RSPCA headquarters


Now that IS a waste of money.


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

Cat_Crazy said:


> tillysdream said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry but I volunteer at one of the local rescue's and can say that Head Office does not give them funds.
> ...


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

rona said:


> The R.S.P.C.A. national headquarters was moved to Horsham in 1973, now while I have no insight into the new headquarters, my father and a good friend were employed by the builders who refitted the previous headquarters before they moved in.
> Can anyone tell me why they would have needed solid oak paneling and desks and some of most expensive carpets around at that time for the inner offices?
> Surely neither of these would have made any difference to the efficiency or H&S of the headquarters.
> I'm sorry, but since being made aware of this in 1973, I have never and never will support the RSPCA headquarters


Ok, its simple economics here, quality carpets will last longer thus saving money in the long run!!!! As is office furniture, the better quality the longer it lasts before needing replacing!

Imagine the headlines.... If they had to replace every couple of years cos they bought cheap tat.... They can't win either way


----------



## Guest (Oct 4, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> Ok, its simple economics here, quality carpets will last longer thus saving money in the long run!!!! As is office furniture, the better quality the longer it lasts before needing replacing!
> 
> Imagine the headlines.... If they had to replace every couple of years cos they bought cheap tat.... They can't win either way


Argh, but the public parts of the building were not up to such standards, only the behind closed doors areas


----------



## Cat_Crazy (Jul 15, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> Cat_Crazy said:
> 
> 
> > Yip, foster care won't be paid by Head Office.
> ...


----------



## manicmania (Sep 25, 2009)

Not much good to say about the RSPCA This link though is enlightening

Time for a review of RSPCA Animal Charity's Bullyboy Tactics ?


----------



## CarolineH (Aug 4, 2009)

If donations to the only charity that can legally do anything about cruelty to pets continue to go down, has anyone given any thought as to what, if anything, may be put in place to replace what the RSPCA actually do manage to do?  Because at this rate, we will be left with nothing unless the Government or local authorities step in to help and if they do, we will see animal welfare standards go down (to make them easier to police) and the number of 'put to sleeps' going up! (in a worst case scenario)


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

CarolineH said:


> If donations to the only charity that can legally do anything about cruelty to pets continue to go down, has anyone given any thought as to what, if anything, may be put in place to replace what the RSPCA actually do manage to do?  Because at this rate, we will be left with nothing unless the Government or local authorities step in to help and if they do, we will see animal welfare standards go down (to make them easier to police) and the number of 'put to sleeps' going up! (in a worst case scenario)


Being left with nothing is certainly one thing that could happen. On the other hand, we could end up forcing the government to act so that the RSPCA is transformed into the charity it should and could be, a charity that spends millions more on the animals they are supposed to rescue instead of spending it on oak panellled offices, and a charity which does not shirk and avoid its responsibilities as it is shown to do in the link posted by manicmania.

You know the saying - if we always do what we always done, we'll always get what we've always got. And what we've got now is something that works for a few animals. I would like to see it working for a lot more.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

rona said:


> I had previously given a positive proof link to their millions in the form of their accounts, but obviously you were not interested enough to read it.
> I do not work on hearsay


I have read the links about the money.

And i has also stated that i was shocked.


----------



## Rosemary77 (Oct 25, 2009)

I don't think you properly appreciate the sheer volume of calls the RSPCA gets each year - over a million.

Work it out: income approximately £100 million - requests for help 1 million

That means that on average only £100 is available to deal with each case. In most places £100 will only cover the vet's consultation fee if an animal is found injured outside normal surgery hours.


----------



## manicmania (Sep 25, 2009)

Rosemary77 said:


> I don't think you properly appreciate the sheer volume of calls the RSPCA gets each year - over a million.
> 
> Work it out: income approximately £100 million - requests for help 1 million
> 
> That means that on average only £100 is available to deal with each case. In most places £100 will only cover the vet's consultation fee if an animal is found injured outside normal surgery hours.


Yes appreciate that but if they would stop using their funds on senseless lawsuits they would be able to apply more funds to their branches.
This one takes the biscuit, think of the money they will be using trying to defend themselves on this
Another RSPCA Cruelty Case Kicked Out


----------



## Rick (Aug 30, 2009)

tillysdream said:


> Ok, its simple economics here, quality carpets will last longer thus saving money in the long run!!!! As is office furniture, the better quality the longer it lasts before needing replacing!
> 
> Imagine the headlines.... If they had to replace every couple of years cos they bought cheap tat.... They can't win either way


I run a business and obviously have to consider costs vs lifespan.

We have no solid oak!

Most of our stuff came from Ikea.


----------



## ellie8024 (May 4, 2009)

a big problem i have is that the RSPCA also advertise and look for donations here in scotland where by law they can do nothing. there was a huge campaign here earlier this year as a about 70% of people thought rspca was the same as SSPCA so were donating to them instead


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

ellie8024 said:


> a big problem i have is that the RSPCA also advertise and look for donations here in scotland where by law they can do nothing. there was a huge campaign here earlier this year as a about 70% of people thought rspca was the same as SSPCA so were donating to them instead


Now that is bad


----------



## Rick (Aug 30, 2009)

ellie8024 said:


> a big problem i have is that the RSPCA also advertise and look for donations here in scotland where by law they can do nothing. there was a huge campaign here earlier this year as a about 70% of people thought rspca was the same as SSPCA so were donating to them instead


remember hearing a report about that, it is a bit norty innit?


----------



## emmisoli (Mar 30, 2009)

I have had one bad run in with the RSPCA... last year my bitch was stolen from a friends garden whilst i was in the house we were over an hour away from home so naturally I was very worried for her. We searched for hours and called all local dog wardens and local vets to no avail. I was gutted as i had to go home without my loving girl.... worse still kids were unconsolable. Anyway after 2 days I get a phone call from the RSPCA saying that they had found my dog. I was over the moon. She said that some gypsy's had picked her up and she had been tied up in a container truck all night crying, someone local had reported the noise and they turned up in the morning. She was on private land. The RSPCA inspector then asked me to get there asap as the gypsies were hanging around and they may take her somewhere else  I was mortified, by the time I had of got dressed and jumped straight in the car it would still have taken me about 1 1/2 hours to get there and that was if traffic was good. I asked her if she could take my bitch until I could get to the kennels to pick her up an hour later..... her reply was " I'm sorry we are unable to tresspass and remove the dog from private land"  again I was mortified by this. Luckily the lovely gentleman that reported the noise was with the officer and asked to speak to me on the phone.... he said he would take her as it was only a civil offence to go on private land and remove the dog and what would the gypsies do anyway they are hardly going to try to claim her as she wasn't theirs anyway they just steal to sell on  the lovely man gave me his address and i was on my way straight away...... I was so pleased to have my beautiful girl back safe and sound, but was in total shock at the RSPCA.... surely she had already trespassed to read the dogs microchip etc so why couldn't they have just taken her ut: needless to say I know that they found her (but anybody could have taken her to get a microchip read at the local vets) that I didn't give them a donation as they didn't attempt to save my dog from being stolen a 2nd time whilst I was travelling to get her


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

emmisoli said:


> I have had one bad run in with the RSPCA... last year my bitch was stolen from a friends garden whilst i was in the house we were over an hour away from home so naturally I was very worried for her. We searched for hours and called all local dog wardens and local vets to no avail. I was gutted as i had to go home without my loving girl.... worse still kids were unconsolable. Anyway after 2 days I get a phone call from the RSPCA saying that they had found my dog. I was over the moon. She said that some gypsy's had picked her up and she had been tied up in a container truck all night crying, someone local had reported the noise and they turned up in the morning. She was on private land. The RSPCA inspector then asked me to get there asap as the gypsies were hanging around and they may take her somewhere else  I was mortified, by the time I had of got dressed and jumped straight in the car it would still have taken me about 1 1/2 hours to get there and that was if traffic was good. I asked her if she could take my bitch until I could get to the kennels to pick her up an hour later..... her reply was " I'm sorry we are unable to tresspass and remove the dog from private land"  again I was mortified by this. Luckily the lovely gentleman that reported the noise was with the officer and asked to speak to me on the phone.... he said he would take her as it was only a civil offence to go on private land and remove the dog and what would the gypsies do anyway they are hardly going to try to claim her as she wasn't theirs anyway they just steal to sell on  the lovely man gave me his address and i was on my way straight away...... I was so pleased to have my beautiful girl back safe and sound, but was in total shock at the RSPCA.... surely she had already trespassed to read the dogs microchip etc so why couldn't they have just taken her ut: needless to say I know that they found her (but anybody could have taken her to get a microchip read at the local vets) that I didn't give them a donation as they didn't attempt to save my dog from being stolen a 2nd time whilst I was travelling to get her


Terrible story, and can understand your frustration! And REALLY glad you got your dog back 

Did you read the whole thread?

The RSPCA/SSPCA must work within the law and legislation....

Morally the RSPCA inspector would have loved to have went in and rescued your dog, but the law as it stands says she can't! It may have cost her, her job if she did! The RSPCA have to be above repproach, and work within the law as a professional body. Or they would spend all their time in court!

As I said earlier in the thread  The RSPCA/SSPCA are at the moment lobbying government for more powers to seize animals in these kind of situations and others. Believe me when I say the RSPCA inspector would have been every bit as frustrated as you, but with the current legislation her hands are tied at the moment!

Show your support and help the RSPCA/SSPCA change things! Lets hope government gives them the powers they need, to end stories just like your dogs one!


----------



## tillysdream (Sep 23, 2009)

ellie8024 said:


> a big problem i have is that the RSPCA also advertise and look for donations here in scotland where by law they can do nothing. there was a huge campaign here earlier this year as a about 70% of people thought rspca was the same as SSPCA so were donating to them instead


Yip, they sure did.... And the SSPCA were not best pleased. A war of words publically between the two ensued as a result!


----------



## zany_toon (Jan 30, 2009)

Living in Scotland, I can only comment on the SSPCA as they are the only ones I have dealings with. What they represent is to be praised, however, the confines of British Law are very much a cause for concern as it is this that prevents them from being able to do their jobs. I have dealt with them only a couple of times one because there was a poorly stray dog running around the streets that some kids were trying to beat up. In this case they responded that unless the dog bit some one they wouldn't be able to help. In itself I find this unacceptable as not only does this jeapordise the people trying to help the animal but also jeapordises the poor dog itself - if it carried on as it was doing it would have been cruelly beaten further by the horrible people who dare to call themselves human whilst risking further injury to the dog - or have led to it's own death as if it had bitten a person it would have been put down as being dangerous. 
The second time I dealt with them, I had a bird stuck in my chimney wall (I could hear it flapping about) on Christmas Eve and the poor thing was getting weaker. Having phoned them they refused to come out. However, with our house being council property it was because they could be sue for damaging private housing. I eventually managed to get the bird out myself and contacted them to check it out.
In both cases, it has been the idiocy of the British law - that so called thing that is in place to "protect" British citizens and their rights - that prevented them from doing their work. And in many cases not being able to go on to private land also prevents them from doing anything to help animals. 
If the government gave both the SSPCA and RSPCA the freedom to do their job as it needs to be done then we would probably find that they would be able to do a great deal more to help animals. 
The only thing that I completely disagree with is the fact that healthy animals may be put down simply because they have been around in the rehoming centres for too long or are considered too old to be rehomed. I understand their reasoning but I don't agree with it - if the CPL and NCDL can look after animals regardless of their age because they are healthy, why can't the SSPCA and RSPCA?


----------



## fluffyangel007 (Oct 15, 2009)

PoisonGirl said:


> If you lived in this country, you would understand.
> 
> I never give any money to the S/RSPCA because I don't feel it gets used appropriately.
> 
> ...


But then it's because of people like you that they can't intervene every time they would like to, and that animals have to be put down., and that they don't have the funds to prosecute everyone they should. They are a charity at the end of the day and rely on public donations to be able to fund any work that they do, no public funds, no animals get help FACT.


----------



## Acacia86 (Dec 30, 2008)

fluffyangel007 said:


> But then it's because of people like you that they can't intervene every time they would like to, and that animals have to be put down., and that they don't have the funds to prosecute everyone they should. They are a charity at the end of the day and rely on public donations to be able to fund any work that they do, no public funds, no animals get help FACT.


In a way i agree...if every single person decided to not give any more then the RSPCA/SSPCA etc would fold...........and where would that leave our beloved animals?

For every bad story there is good. No one has denied that they don't have faults, that they don't make mistakes..................yes i know its very sadly at the cost of the poor animals life....but then so do many other shelters. Even ''no destroy'' shelters can and have done made mistakes that the makes the animal a sad victim.

Nothing is perfect in this world.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

fluffyangel007 said:


> But then it's because of people like you that they can't intervene every time they would like to, and that animals have to be put down., and that they don't have the funds to prosecute everyone they should. They are a charity at the end of the day and rely on public donations to be able to fund any work that they do, no public funds, no animals get help FACT.


Rather than blaming people for not donating, why don't you blame the real culprits - the RSPCA themselves? They are a wealthy organisation. They have more than enough funds to do what they do, and much, much more. They have over £234 million in assets, and they keep over £3 million of donations a year (money that misguided people have donated to help animals) to increase their bank account and furnish offices in a way that wouldn't look out of place in a stately home.


----------



## fluffyangel007 (Oct 15, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> Rather than blaming people for not donating, why don't you blame the real culprits - the RSPCA themselves? They are a wealthy organisation. They have more than enough funds to do what they do, and much, much more. They have over £234 million in assets, and they keep over £3 million of donations a year (money that misguided people have donated to help animals) to increase their bank account and furnish offices in a way that wouldn't look out of place in a stately home.


Oh please.... You obviously don't know anything about how charities work?! You think the RSCPA is the only charity which has funds in assests?? I know lets stop supporting all charities shall we?

And can I also ask you to reference your sources when using figures!


----------



## fluffyangel007 (Oct 15, 2009)

Acacia86 said:


> In a way i agree...if every single person decided to not give any more then the RSPCA/SSPCA etc would fold...........and where would that leave our beloved animals?
> 
> For every bad story there is good. No one has denied that they don't have faults, that they don't make mistakes..................yes i know its very sadly at the cost of the poor animals life....but then so do many other shelters. Even ''no destroy'' shelters can and have done made mistakes that the makes the animal a sad victim.
> 
> Nothing is perfect in this world.


Totally agree... I think the council pounds are worse than that of the RSCPA, especially in Wales I have heard some horror stories from there. My dog was in one of those prior to being rescued by dogfriends, the Welsh pound was going to put her to sleep. She was perfectly healthy and only 7 weeks old.


----------



## wooliewoo (May 27, 2008)

Going from info at our local RSPCA where im having pups chipped, they do not recieve the amounts of money needed to keep them going and rely on donations to them direct. It seems RSPCA donations go into 1 big pot and local units have to fight to get that money. This is why i give direct to local unit .


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

fluffyangel007 said:


> Oh please.... You obviously don't know anything about how charities work?! You think the RSCPA is the only charity which has funds in assests?? I know lets stop supporting all charities shall we?
> 
> And can I also ask you to reference your sources when using figures!


No need for the sarcastic tone. I naturally assumed you had read the whole thread. If you *had* read the thread you would know that:

a) the sources have already been referenced
b) the RSPCA has been compared to other charities and found wanting
c) I have advocated supporting charities who do not sequester their money away as the RSPCA does.

As you obviously cannot be bothered to read the thread, I've printed the relevant posts below.



HighPr00 said:


> Charity Commision - ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS - Charity overview





Spellweaver said:


> Thanks for this HighPr00. Very interesting report that supports what people on here were saying about the wealth of the chairty.
> 
> Own use assets (whatever that means!) £83 million
> other assets £28 million
> ...





Spellweaver said:


> I would agree that every charity needs investment and a nest egg to cover hard times. But £234 million seems to be far too excessive. Other charities seem to be able to function on far less, with no threat of going under.
> 
> AHT:
> Charity overview
> ...


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

i always feel when i look at the rspca web site that it is the same animals and very few of them get rehomed??
most good well run animal rescue places make a huge effort to look after and rehome.but i always feel the rspca isnt that great so i dont give to them.
i also am mistrustfull of most charities.
i know its a shame but its how i feel i think a lot of cash donated dosent get used where we think its going to be used.
i like to donate to the guide dogs
my thoughts noogsy x


----------



## CarolineH (Aug 4, 2009)

The RSPCA are on a hiding to nothing - they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.ut: But where would we be without them at all? Better off? The police would take over animal cruelty cases? Can you really see that happening in a million years?


----------



## fluffyangel007 (Oct 15, 2009)

Spellweaver, No your right I don't have time to read through 20 odd pages I'm at work and popping on here in my break. I don't see anything wrong with their accounts and find them very similar to accounts of charities of similar size and stature. Maybe you want to be comparing them to charities like Cancer Research and Save the Children.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

fluffyangel007 said:


> Spellweaver, No your right I don't have time to read through 20 odd pages I'm at work and popping on here in my break. I don't see anything wrong with their accounts and find them very similar to accounts of charities of similar size and stature. Maybe you want to be comparing them to charities like Cancer Research and Save the Children.


OK - comparison coming up:

Save the Chikdren is a much larger charity than the RSPCA:

No of employees: RSPCA 1505 Save the Children 4076
No of volunteers: RSPCA 850 Save the Children 9133

own use assets - RSPCA 83 million, Save the Children 3.8 million (why do the RSPCA need so much for themselves compared to Save the Children?)
other assets - RSPCA 28 million, Save the Children 67 million
investments - RSPCA 123 million, Save the Children 21.29 million

*Total assests and investments*: RSPCA *234 million*, Save the Children *92 million.*

Seems doing the comparison you suggested rather proves my case!

http://www.charity-commission.gov.u...steredCharityNumber=213890&SubsidiaryNumber=0
ref:


----------



## manicmania (Sep 25, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> OK - comparison coming up:
> 
> Save the Chikdren is a much larger charity than the RSPCA:
> 
> ...


Haha well you sure did your homework well done and it sure does prove the point


----------



## fluffyangel007 (Oct 15, 2009)

Do you know what if I have time tomorrow afternoon I am going to phone up and ask them!


----------



## Guest (Oct 27, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> OK - comparison coming up:
> 
> Save the Chikdren is a much larger charity than the RSPCA:
> 
> ...


Well Well Well
Surprise Surprise NOT


----------



## sid&kira (Oct 15, 2009)

the rspca is ment to follow the welfare act, and therefore the '5 freedoms'

freedom for *fear* and *distress*
freedom from *pain, injury* and *disease*
freedom from *hunger* and *thirst*
freedom to *express natural behaviour*
freedom from *pain* and *discomfort*

it is ment to stop these things but like the dog who was left alone, they wouldnt do anything even though it was clearly *distressed*, *hungry* and *thirsty*

the beaten animals that get reported, the cant do anything because they have food, water and shelter. even though they're obviously in *pain*, *distress*, *discomfort* and possibly *injured*

i'd like to see them properly enforce the law/act they helped to write, maybe then i would donate to them...


----------



## fluffyangel007 (Oct 15, 2009)

But they do not have the power of law enforcement... They are a charity.


----------



## Rosemary77 (Oct 25, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> No of volunteers: RSPCA 850 Save the Children 9133
> 
> own use assets - RSPCA 83 million, Save the Children 3.8 million (why do the RSPCA need so much for themselves compared to Save the Children?)


Because "own use assets" are things like animal homes and clinics - the value of the physical buildings. They appear on the balance sheet because they could be sold to pay debts if things went really pear-shaped.

Save the Children is mostly giving grants to people overseas to do relief work.


----------



## HighPr00 (Aug 9, 2009)

Police investigate RSPCA for animal cruelty over dog deaths - Telegraph


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Rosemary77 said:


> Because "own use assets" are things like animal homes and clinics - the value of the physical buildings. They appear on the balance sheet because they could be sold to pay debts if things went really pear-shaped.
> 
> Save the Children is mostly giving grants to people overseas to do relief work.


And the relief workers overseas need clinics, hospitals, physical buildings such as schools etc - as many worldwide, if not more, than the RSPCA needs in England, surely? And there must be offices, charity shops etc in this country owned by Save the Children. Sorry, but the RSPCA needing 83 million compared to Save the Children needing 3.8million still seems decidedly fishy to me!


----------

