RSPCA WHAT THEY DIDN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW

This information was requested in August - the answer received in December!

Remember now that they stated:

"It was an absolutely extreme case. The bolt gun is certainly not used routinely by our officers."

Liar Liar Liar

Thank you for your enquiry.

Please accept our apologies for the delay in response; this is due to an exceptionally high number of enquiries received over recent months and it is taking some time to reply to them all.

Not all the figures you have requested are available and we would normally require greater background and context so that we can understand the purposes for which the statistics will be used. However, we hope you find the following information helpful.

On average the Society rehomes over 60,000 animals every year. It has been necessary for our inspectorate to euthanase 576 dogs so far this year, 65 by captive bolt. The use of the captive bolt is the quickest and kindest approach under certain circumstances, but the Society recognises that it may be perceived as a controversial method of euthanasia for companion animals.

Sadly, the RSPCA is often seen as the charity of last resort and so that an animal's welfare is not compromised further, euthanasia is often the kindest option. No one working for the Society finds this aspect of their role at all easy. Until there is greater recognition of the issues surrounding indiscriminate breeding and irresponsible pet ownership it is likely to remain an aspect of our work.

We have new campaigns and education programmes planned for 2010 that will highlight and address these fundamental concerns.

Other animal welfare charities claim they do not put animals to sleep but say they are unable to assist owners in many more challenging circumstances. The RSPCA does not believe this is an acceptable response as further animal suffering is often the result.

Thank you again for contacting the Society, and we hope the above information has been of interest.

Kind regards
RSPCA HQ Advice Team

SO RSPCA, HAVE THESE OTHER 55 BEEN EXTREME CASES AS WELL?????

ANOTHER BLOOD-STAINED GRAVY TRAIN BEGINS, WE FEAR FOR THE RSPCA?

London 2012 Olympics urged to give animal welfare a sporting chance

RSPCA welcomes news on cage-free eggs but disappointed by lack of commitment to other species –Monday, 07, Dec 2009 12:00

Will this be a "Cage Free" Olympics? If the Olympics want "free range food", then why are they using "Freedom Food", which (despite its misleading name) is no guarantee of free-range? The RSPCA's big food campaign at the moment is on so-called "cage free eggs", which are essentially no better than battery hens. Another blood-stained gravy train begins, I fear for the RSPCA? Will RSPCA inspectors be "on duty" at the Olympics, at the public expense? Perhaps checking that none of the athletes from Ghana have trained while feeding on rat meat?

The end of Trust

by Irene Barker (Hillside Supporter)

A few days ago I spent a pleasant morning in Bury St. Edmunds, enjoying the market, doing a little shopping. The West Suffolk branch of the RSPCA was holding a street collection to raise funds and their collectors were to be seen through the town, standing quietly on

street corners, many accompanied by their dogs. We talked about the difficulty of raising money in these straightened times and the fact that there are more than 170 local branches of the RSPCA, all so-called ‘independent’ all receiving little financial help from central RSPCA, the third richest charity in Great Britain. I saw that these kindly, honest, committed people were the true face of the RSPCA, the face I believe is the driving force behind everything good the RSPCA does, who work tirelessly to raise much-needed funds, who do not grand-stand their compassion, who stroked my (rescued) dog and by so doing acknowledged his right, and the right of millions of his fellow creatures, to help, protection, sanctuary. Here was to be found the empathy, the altruism, the widening circle that flowed inevitably from William Wilberforce’s crusade to end human slavery to include all creatures great and small, including my totally insignificant dog.

Freedom Food pigs (August 2009) with accompanying dead crows. Presumably these have been placed around the pen to prevent other birds from stealing the pigs’ food!

And what of the other face of the RSPCA? The official face, that now appears monolithic, unaccountable, defensive, secretive, heartless? How did I come to lose faith in them? How did my thirty years of unquestioning support, both moral and financial, morph into a sense of betrayal, a dissipation of that most precious commodity, trust, which is the essential bedrock of all charities?

It started in 2007. I saw the footage on ‘Tonight with Trevor Mcdonald’ of the Hillside exposé of Freedom Food accredited farms (FF). Nothing has affected me more profoundly than this. It is not just because of the unspeakable cruelty exposed in that report. It is not just because the cruelty took place on a British, not a foreign farm. It was because I felt betrayed by the very organisation that promised me unconditional protection of animals, and instead offered me this image of FF -accredited, RSPCA - sponsored, hell.

Then began a two year long correspondence between me and various officials of the RSPCA.

Freedom Food pigs (July 2009) lFreedom Food pigs (July 2009) left to decompose in skip. The same remains were still evident in September 2009. eft to decompose in skip. The same remains were still evident in September 2009.

To say the correspondence was disturbing barely covers it. From the word go a defensive wall went up, and I was in turns sniped at, ignored, told that our correspondence was at an end (unsuccessfully) and fed inaccurate and irrelevant information. However, my persistence did culminate in Mark Watts, Chief Executive RSPCA, offering me an audience with Leigh Grant, Chief Executive Freedom Food, which took place in September 2008. The interview did absolutely nothing to reassure me. It simply reinforced my conviction that the RSPCA had a tiger by the tail and was too frightened of a public backlash and possible PR disaster to let it go. Much of Leigh Grant’s defence of Freedom Food was based on quotations from the FAWC handbook, otherwise known as How to Be an Intensive Animal Producer and at the Same Time Give the Appearance of a Committed Animal Welfarist. Even a casual reading soon reveals that Freedom Food protocols and Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) protocols are generally indistinguishable from one another except in minor details and in turn pretty indistinguishable from mainstream, bog-standard welfare systems such as Farm Assured and Red Tractor.

I sent a detailed account of the interview to Mark Watts and received no reply. Then the next exposé hit the screens, this time on Channel 5 news, and I wrote again to Mark Watts urging him to act. I might as well have been calling out for a response from the Marie Celeste.

Why has there been no change as promised by Mark Watts? Why is there a cult of secrecy about the list of farms accredited by FF? Is it because so many of them fall by the wayside or lose interest, that any information about who’s in and who’s out cannot be relied upon to be accurate for more than a few months? It seems that farms unilaterally decide that they do not want to stay in the scheme, the contract between the producer and FF so tenuous and poorly formulated that they are meaningless and can be breached with impunity. And why, despite overwhelming evidence, the apparent unwillingness to prosecute FF accredited farms?

Why haven’t the images of creatures in extremis under their watch not galvanised the RSPCA into a root and branch review of the FF protocols?Why does the RSPCA persist in its stubborn conviction that behind any criticism of them there must lurk a hidden agenda? Such self- serving fantasies are themselves the product of a mindset that seems to believe that simply monitoring the multinational meat producers will bring about the dawn of a new era of responsible, cruelty-free farming, where the lives of our non-human fellow travellers are all sweetness and light, interrupted by a peaceful and swift demise at the gentle hands of the abattoir worker. No teeth clipping or castration without anaesthetic, no tail docking, no confinement in filthy pens and the final, squalid end to a nasty, short and brutish life on the killing floors of the abattoir. No subjection to attacks from sadistic morons to whose care these helpless creatures have been committed. This is the Disneyland image of farming the RSPCA in its persona as Freedom Food would present to us, fostered by sentimental fools like Jamie Oliver and Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall. The RSPCA has undermined its moral credibility by legitimising a commercial system where money and not compassion is the bottom line. It must rethink its basic principles if it wants to regain trust, if it wants to convince us that it is compassion which turns its wheels rather than a macho culture of hard- nosed business ethics, a contradiction in terms if ever there was one. There are more contradictions and mutually exclusive value systems than you could shake a stick at to be found in the unholy alliance between FF and the RSPCA.

Freedom Food pig (January 2009). Although shown with straw bedding, marks indicate depth of slurry it has to wade through with massive hernia.

Before my lacerating experience with Freedom Food and its defenders I had never heard of Hillside Animal Sanctuary. It is only because of the work they do with rescued farm animals that I came to hear about them and their courageous exposés of barbaric practices in farms. Their many confrontations with the RSPCA seemed to match my own. It was finally the realisation that I was not alone in my concerns that brought me to this point. The RSPCA can take absolutely no comfort in the fact that it has been their intransigence, their secrecy, their aggressive refusal to engage in transparent debate about the many problems with FF, that I have sought common cause with their nemesis.

There will be more pain to come. It is in the nature of the beast that is FF. More helpless, voiceless, tormented, scraps of unvalued life will die in misery before the monolith that is now the RSPCA returns to its founding principles; until its suits, its faceless administrators and bureaucrats and its hopelessly ill-briefed press officers leave their desks, visit local branches, inspect for themselves a Freedom Farm or two, smell for themselves the terrible stench of fear and despair, look into the eyes of their real clients, and see for themselves who are truly the real RSPCA.

Irene Barker

Excerpts taken from Hillside Sanctuary Winter News Letter 2009

WSPA - SAVING DOGS FROM SLAUGHTER. RSPCA - SLAUGHTER DOGS!!

IS THIS HOW AN RSPCA INSPECTOR VIEWS YOUR MUCH LOVED PET?

In developing countries the World Society for Protection of Animals are preventing the culling of dogs by barbaric methods:

In the UK, an RSPCA inspector is sent out to do the culling. One of their favourite weapons is the captive bolt gun - a method deemed unacceptable by the WSPA.

'As there is a high risk of mis-stunning through inadequate use of the penetrating captive bolt, and hence causing pain and distress, WSPA considers this an unacceptable method for the euthanasia of dogs and cats.'

It's not strays that are at risk from the RSPCA (they don't help strays) but peoples pets - so make sure you have made a will so that your pets don't end up in their hands when you are gone.

'With a lack of knowledge and resources, communities in developing countries frequently resort to randomly culling strays, by poisoning, electrocuting or shooting dogs.

These methods are inhumane, causing the animals great pain and suffering. They are also ineffective in the long term as they do not address the cause of the problem.'

But your buddies the RSPCA think it's OK to shoot dogs. They don't use free bullets though - too expensive.

In Bali the WSPA have been working with the Bali Animal Welfare Association to promote:

'Vaccination, education, compassion'

In some countries, dog control officers armed with shotguns randomly shoot dogs in the streets.

In the UK RSPCA inspectors are happy to do it in peoples back gardens!

'Over the longer term, WSPA is helping reduce stray dog populations by educating people about responsible dog ownership. We're making sure owners know about sterilizing and caring for their animals. So that people won't abandon dogs, we're encouraging them to register their pets and we're getting governments to help through compulsory registration. WSPA is also helping enforce animal welfare legislation so people will treat pets humanely.

WSPA works to provide education about responsible pet ownership: dog identification, vaccination and neutering means fewer animals will end up on the street.

Our vision is that all countries will use effective and cruelty free methods of stray population management that address the roots of the problem.'

We think you had better speak to your buddies at the RSPCA in the UK then!

But lets not forget the joint statement by the WSPA and their buddies at the RSPCA - trying desperately to cover each other ass!

We think their slogan should be:

"By joining The WSPA Animal Rescue Team or making an urgent donation today, you can also help ensure that when dogs are slaughtered like vermin we will issue a joint press release with the perpetrators condoning it."

WSPA - WORLD SOCIETY FOR PROTECTION OF ANIMALS

HOW THE RSPCA INSPECTOR FINALLY ENDED THE LIVES OF THE TEN GERMAN SHEPHERDS

Remember their 1st statement?

Thank you for your enquiry. Please accept our apologies for the delay in replying. We receive a very large volume of enquiries here and have to prioritise to deal with urgent animal welfare issues first.

There has been some misinformation posted with regard to this case. The facts are as follows:

We received a call on 23 June this year from a member of the public relating to 10 German Shepherd dogs at an address in Pontardawe, in south Wales. The caller said the dogs owner, a relative, had died and the dogs had been living on their own.

An RSPCA inspector visited the premises that day and assessed the animals. The inspector took the decision that none of the dogs were at all suitable for rehoming due to concerns about their aggressive behaviour and lack of socialisation with people. The dogs were also suffering from a severe skin condition.

We explained the next-of-kin that they should contact other rescue groups for help. The next-of-kin were made fully aware that if the RSPCA became involved, the dogs would be euthanased.

The owners next-of-kin later contacted the RSPCA again and said they had been turned down by other charities who were unwilling to take on the animals and they signed over the dogs, fully aware of what would happen.

It is the RSPCAs raison d'etre to prevent cruelty to animals, and it was decided this sad, but ultimately necessary, outcome for the dogs was the best way to prevent the animals any further suffering. The decision was not made lightly and, as always, it was made with the best interests of the animal at heart.

Thank you again for contacting the Society.

Kind regards

RSPCA HQ Advice Team

But how did you kill the dogs?

Thank you for your further enquiry.

Yes, they were. A decision was made following a discussion between eight RSPCA officers that the most humane form of euthanasia would be to use a captive bolt. This would minimise distress to the dogs, while also being the safest method for those people responsible for dealing with the animals. Restraining the dogs and then shaving a limb to prepare for a lethal injection would have caused these animals unnecessary suffering, due to the animals suffering from a severe skin condition.

Thank you again for contacting the Society.

Kind regards

RSPCA HQ Advice Team

But how did you kill the dogs - ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!

RSPCA not tell the truth! Who would have thought it?

Under their General Principles, the RSPCA states ‘The general principles on which the RSPCA operates, derived from extensive scientific evidence, is based on the fact that vertebrates and some invertebrates are sentient, and can feel pain and distress.’

Ah yes, we are getting there now.

This is the peaceful death they gave those 10 GSD's

RSPCA -WILL THE POLICE ACTUALLY PROSECUTE THEM FOR CRUELTY

Bill and Sylvia run Many Tears Rescue in Wales

This is from Sylvia's Blog

Then one more amazing thing, "Pets at Home" deciding to give us money for a new small van, these are all fantastic things... BUT I am deeply affected by the RSPCA shooting dogs with dead bolt gun. We thought having got over 7000 signatures and having an arranged meeting they were going to listen. We thought by showing them that Ireland band that method of killing dogs in their own pounds over 25 years ago they would see sense. We thought by finding out so many of their own staff and supporters throughout the country did not support this, they would stop. Instead they let us plan our questions, they let us plan this meeting, they told us who they were bringing to represent them, they agreed on a time a place, and never said a word differently. An MP coming on our behalf met a big wig RSPCA representative at parliament and on saying "see you at the meeting" was told "Oh I think we are cancelling that". But they never told us, we had to call them to verified this.
So now Bill my husband, a once part time cowboy from Tucson Arizona, a once big meat eater has bought a video on dead bolt guns and slaughter. It is graphic, of course not showing dogs (as only mentally ill people would consider doing that to dogs in my opinion) but farm animals (which is terrible also). Bill wants to get his facts so right that no one can ignore what the RSPCA have done and continue to do. Now every time I walk in my sitting room I see glimpse of the video he is researching time and time again and life is feeling so hideous, so terrible, so futile and those GSD's lives and deaths keep flashing into my mind.
Worse still people have told me of popping noises from the woods behind our local centre, of officers walking dogs off the van into the woods and then noises and of quotas of live dogs needing to be brought in. I don't know what to think but I cannot bare the thought of what the RSPCA does not want us to know.
If I had my own genie who would grant my own wish it would be Simon Cowel or Richard Branson with their millions would start a humane animal policing system. Where they would work with rescues and do good for animals. Then those not willing to listen, to care, to work with others and feeling beyond reproach would no longer be needed. This is not aimed at the actual centres whose staff care and work tirelessly to help animals, but to the others who will blindly slaughter simply because their commanders say.

http://www.manytears.co.uk/

RSPCA INSPECTORS - ARMED AND DANGEROUS IF YOU ARE AN ANIMAL

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST

And you thought they were nice people who cared about helping animals!!

1. Which RSPCA inspectors or other employees in your area hold firearms licences?

There are 12 RSPCA employees in the S**** W**** Police area that hold firearms certificates.

2. Can you name these individuals?

Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires S**** W**** Police, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which:

(a) states that fact,

(b) specifies the exemption in question and

(c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies .

In relation to your request for the above information, the following exemption applies :

Section 40 (2)- Personal Information (absolute exemption)

3. If licensed, what type and calibre of firearms are carried by each RSPCA employee?

RSPCA Inspectors are certificated to possess and use a .32” single shot pistol with a ported barrel. They are

also issued with a captive bolt utilising a .22” blank cartridge but these are not subject to firearms certificate control. There are a number of additional officers who are certificated to possess and use a 12g shotgun and tranquiliser rifle equipment. So how come they couldn't dart and tranquilise the 10 GSD"S they slaughteered and get them into kennels for assessment?

4. What reasons were given by the RSPCA employees for requiring the firearm(s)

The Inspectors possess the firearms referred to for the humane despatch of animals. There is nothing humane about being dragged out on a catch pole, hit at least once with a captive bolt gun and then pithed with a metal rod such as a screwdriver!

5. Where do RSPCA employees indicate that they will use the firearms?

RSPCA Inspectors seek to use the firearms wherever they have good reason to do so and wherever they can lawfully be. What is a good reason? When they fancy a bit of blood sport?

6. Do they have an 'open certificate'

In the sense that the firearms can be used wherever they have lawful access then the certificate might be likened to one possessed by a shooter in the form that is known as an “open” certificate . However it is legally possible for an Inspector to have access to land without the landowner’s permission, which would not be the

case for a certificate holder with an open condition in the usual understanding of that term. There may be other detailed legal considerations of this nature, that can be considered on a case by case basis . What piece of legislation allows an RSPCA inspector to access someone's land without permission? They have no power of entry or any right to trespass!!

Nice to know how your donations are being spent isn't it?

RSPCA DESPERATE FOR PUBLICITY TRY AND CAPITALISE ON THE MISERY OF THE FLOODS IN CUMBRIA

HOW MUCH OF YOUR GENEROUSLY DONATED MONEY DID ALL THAT EXPENSIVE LOOKING GEAR COST?

I think we should make this a caption competition!!

So when did the RSPCA become an emergency service? Was is necessary to send 60 officers (they have no powers, just titles) to rescue a few cats and dogs - which they did after the flood waters had subsided.

But have no fear Tim Wass is here:

'The town of Cockermouth, which was one of the worst affected areas, has had to cancel Sunday's Christmas lights switch-on.But there are hopes the Christmas tree, which was salvaged from the wreckage by rescue workers, will be lit. Chief officer of the RSPCA , Tim Wass, said: "They want to send a clear signal that Cockermouth will get back on its feet as quickly as possible. So they should light a tree."Mr Wass and his team of around 60 officers have been assisting emergency services in their rescues over the last two days. "We have been rescuing people as well as animals."He and his team rescued two cats from a first-floor flat in Victoria Street, one of the worst hit areas.'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/8372323.stm

Add your captions here:

http://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/why-do-the-rspca-have-stab-proof-vests/

We rather like:

‘So inspector, how many animals did you save today?’……….’two dogs and a cat sir’……….’Well thats not very good is it’…………..’No sir, but I did shoot 10 GSD’s’………….’Good man, you’re promoted’.

The real heros in this awful mess are of course the police and the volunteers from the RNLI and Mountain Rescue who sought no publicity but just got on with the job in hand.

RSPCA DIGGING THEMSELVES A BIGGER HOLE

STILL NO SIGN OF REMORSE OR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT AN ERROR OF JUDGEMENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN MADE.

Yet another reply from the ARSE PCA - slightly different version but digging themselves an even bigger hole.

Original Message -----

From: "Enqserv Enqserv"

To: XXXX

Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 4:06 PM

Subject: Re: Ten German Shepherd dogs shot by RSPCA

Thank you for your email.

The RSPCA received a call from a member of the public in mid-June this year relating to ten German Shepherd Dogs at an address in South Wales.

The caller said the dogs' owner had died and the dogs had been living on their own.

The dogs, of varying ages, had been living wild within the house and in the opinion of the lead officer, who has 29 years of experience in the Society, they were too dangerous to be passed into human care or re-homed. They lived with an elderly couple. Where was the expert witness that assessed these dogs? The dogs were also suffering with a skin condition. They were never seen by a vet! Mange is treatable. We advised the family we would be unable to re-home these dogs and that, if this was the route they wanted to pursue, they might like to consider contacting other rescue organisations direct. But you said they were too dangerous to rehome!!! The family contacted us again and we explained that, regrettably, we believed euthanasia was the only option (cheapest) for these dogs and they agreed to sign them over to us. We do not think it is responsible for us to attempt to re-home animals we believe pose a danger to members of the public or other animals. But it's OK to tell the family to approach other rescues for help!

Our inspectors carefully considered what would be the most appropriate method of ensuring the dogs were put to sleep humanely. After taking all relevant factors in to account, the RSPCA inspectors involved decided that use of a captive bolt would be the most humane option.

The WSPA considers the captive bolt to be an unacceptable method for euthanaising cats and dogs because of the high risk of mis-stun. The WSPA do not use this method in any of their projects worldwide

Our inspectors are trained in different methods of euthanasia and the suitability of any particular method will depend on individual circumstances. Seems like they get plenty of practice with their firearms!!!

We would like to emphasise that the Society is keen to work with other organisations that share our love of animals and hold a similar belief in high welfare standards, and that people join in order to help animals. The RSPCA have a love of £££££££££££££ not animals anymore and they do not work with breed rescues - they consider themselves to be experts. They are certainly expert in killing.

Euthanasia is a last resort and is only used to stop further suffering. We aim to rehome unwanted animals wherever we can (our inspectors murder them in the back of their van where they can get away with it) and in 2008 we rehomed over 87,000 (killed 60,203) animals in total, including nearly 16,000 dogs - but killed 8,313 dogs and 12,329 cats.

The priority for everyone at the RSPCA, whether frontline inspectors, volunteers or staff, is to help animals (make money) and stop suffering - our pension pots suffering so we need to kill more animals to save money. The Society has to make extremely hard choices like this on a regular basis, these decisions are never taken lightly, and are always difficult for those involved. Big fat salaries, index linked pension, company cars - who gives a shit about animals!!

The Society will not be issuing any further statements on this issue. Because we keep digging ourselves a BIGGER hole.

Thank you for contacting the Society and for your obvious concern for animal welfare. Thank you for your obvious lack of concern

Kind regards

RSPCA HQ Advice Team

Remember that a captive bolt does not kill - it STUNS. The dogs were killed when the inspector shoved a metal rod such as a screwdriver into the hole made by the captive bolt - to mash up the dog brains.

IS THIS HOW YOU THOUGHT YOUR DONATION WOULD BE USED?

'THE RSPCA IS A DEFUNCT AND HEINOUS AUTHORITARIAN ESTABLISHMENT THAT SHOULD NO LONGER EXIST IN BRITAIN'

At last, they are being exposed for what they are really about!!

The RSPCA is a defunct and heinous authoritarian establishment that should no longer exist in Britain. Run by joyless bureaucrats who treat humans with about as much respect as dish-rags, with no obvious benefit to the millions of pets in this country, it exploits the powers granted to it by the state and the contradictory, sloppily worded Animal Welfare Act 2006 to terrorise innocent animal-lovers across the UK. Most of the public don’t know how powerful a lobby group and propaganda machine the RSPCA actually is. It has successfully sewn up all the major bodies which play a part in implementing the AWA (not just the police and the media, but the general public and even law courts too), and uses them to hound people for their own financial gain.

Yes it is cheaper to prosecute than advertise. And since the RSPCA have the power to prosecute, they have been milking this power for all its worth – after all every court case brings publicity and therefore, donations. The budget is almost entirely funded by donations – in excess of £100 million a year. Staffs at the RSPCA are paid handsomely, and get free housing loans. The UK’s ‘Director-General” has an annual salary of £90,000. They recently built a new Head Quarters costing ten million pounds and other newly built local facilities now house more staff and fewer animals. Then there is the story of the RSPCA facility at Swansea. After ten years of fund-raising they felt ready to build a new and better centre. It now has excellent, spacious administrative offices, but room to keep just 27 dogs. They had previously been able to house 140. It’s good to know that the donations are being spent usefully. Presumably the dogs that can no longer be housed will put down immediately, on the grounds of their age, or some asserted (but unproven) defect.

A quick look at the facts will tell you everything you need to know. The RSPCA kills over half of the cats and dogs it comes into contact with. The AWA 2006 could see you incarcerated for letting your dog eat a piece of chocolate. The RSPCA regularly and illegally break into people’s houses and seize their pets for no good reason. They seem to have three ways of dealing with complaints about this by the way. One is destroying the evidence, such as by cremating the bodies, so the defendant can in no way prove that their pet was not suffering from injuries or disease at the time of their seizure. The second is by keeping the animal in a so-called ‘safe haven’ of solitary confinement so that the defendant cannot even access the animal in order for their vet or animal doctor to run an independent assessment of the animal prior to any trial proceedings. And let’s not forget their penchant of hiring unprofessional vets of their own, or vets that are willing to lie in court and produce one-sided arguments in order to gain favour with the RSPCA. Council members who question the RSPCA are silenced and dismissed. And finally, the very fact that the RSPCA equates ‘saving’ an animal with ‘putting it down’ should be enough to make our hairs stand on end. Just try typing ‘RPSCA victims’ into Google and see what you come up with.

Such case studies are growing in huge numbers every year – there is even a website called ‘Victims of the RSPCA’ where innocent pet lovers across the UK describe their shameful treatment at the hands of this all too forceful and frankly unnecessary authoritarian charity, such as the pensioner couple who were told their beloved cat was suffering from starvation, liver failure and blindness, and it would have to be put down. In fact it was only suffering from fleas. Had they let their cat go with the RSPCA inspector she would certainly have been murdered. Or the story of a dog shelter in Ghent, Wales which the RSPCA deemed ‘overcrowded’ despite the hours of care afforded to every dog from dedicated and genuine animal-loving workers. Under strict orders never to repeat the story, the workers were forced to slaughter over 70 dogs at the shelter, to comply with the RSPCA rules and regulations and many suffered from nervous breakdowns as a result. This story and countless others paint a very different picture of the RSPCA indeed – but even so their slick PR machine is as well oiled as it ever was and the public still remain woefully unaware that their primary concern has become how to keep the money flowing. Why do we keep letting them get away with this?

Maybe it is their PR machine and how good it is as bringing them out shining in every case. As recently as last year the RSPCA launched a campaign to stop children in schools from having classroom pets – a cornerstone of learning how to care for animals and take responsibility for them. In an increasingly bureaucratic age where even our children’s educations are being cross-examined, mutilated, revised and tested by our over-compensating government, a classroom pet can bring some much needed respite into a class and give teachers and pupils a rare opportunity to bond. Not anymore, thanks to the RSPCA who ‘worry’ that the bright lights and noisy conditions may distress the animals – while of course keeping them in equally noisy, cramped cages in their shelters wouldn’t be. Added to this their declaration that pet shops should not be allowed to sell pets as many pet-shop owners are unaware as to how to care for the animals, and what you have is a growing and frightening monopoly over animal ‘welfare’ and even pet ownership. And why should we doubt that this is what the RSPCA has had in mind all along? If they can wield their power over the smallest shelters in local areas, they can almost certainly do the same to pet shops and suddenly, nobody will be able to purchase a pet without first being vetted stringently by the RSPCA. And no matter how much “Animal Rights Activists” will bleat that this is a good idea – I certainly don’t want to see my wish to own a pet get dissected and scrutinised by a charity that is as ruthless as it is incompetent. As an aside, I want to add that I despise you so-called animal rights activists. Don’t you think it’s time that we began trusting each other in this country? Not every man woman or child that wants to own a dog has a view to abusing it you know. The result of 12 years of this right-curbing government is a people that sanctimoniously believe they have a right to vet every potential animal owner. It makes me sick. As a free-thinker, I despise a monopoly of any kind and I can warn you now that a monopoly of this kind will make it increasingly difficult to own a pet, increasingly impossible to look after it with your privacy intact, and almost guarantee that the welfare of animals be side-stepped as the ‘charity’ bloats and makes more and more money for itself.

The deeper one digs, the more disturbing the facts are that come out – council members sacked for daring to question their policies, animals being forcibly taken away and put down without the consent of their owners, and those same owners then being charged for kennelling costs. The organisation is rotten, corrupt to the core, and there is sparse evidence to suggest that they have improved the welfare of animals in this country. Putting animals down does not equate with ‘saving’ them and I resent their twisted logic on this matter. Given a choice between living on the street and being killed ‘humanely’ I know which one I’d pick. Why shouldn’t our pets, and indeed their loving and caring owners be given the same choice?

http://theconservativeblog.co.uk/?p=715