_________________

_________________

_________________

_________________

Sorry but you are wrong shebajet..

The only "right" the rspca have it to try to educate owners - as in they have the right to tell them how best to look after an animal IF the owner wants to listen.. If the owner does not then they have no right what so ever.

If they have police backing when they call then the police have rights of course, but even then the RSPCA have no right to enter nor right to seize unless they are specifically named on a search warrant.

RSPCA 'officers' are not officers, they are nothing more than members of the public, civilians, and in many cases they are not even that - they have and still do pretend to have powers of entry, powers of seizure, and therefore are dishonest citizens which is even more reason to never permit them access to your property.

The RSPCA is a joke of an organisation, they pretend to be something they are not, they lie, and they frequently break the law by doing so, they waste thousands of pounds of public donations defending indefensible claims and another thing I find particularly unpalatable was their fund-raising initiatives here in Scotland taking donations from the Scottish people when they will do absolutely NOTHING to help an animal this side of the border at all.

it is high time the organisation was put in a big bag and given a bloody good shake up IMO

And yes I have had dealings with them, and yes they did state they had a legal right to take my dog to be examined by their vet, And they did say that if I refused I would be arrested..

My answer was if you wish to have this dog examined by a vet then he will be examined by his OWN vet who he knows, and the RSPCA will pay for a taxi for me and him to and back from HIS vet, and the RSPCA will pay HIS vet for the examination, and if that examination proved (as I knew it would) that my dog was in perfectly good health I would prosecute the RSPCA and the "Inspector" specifically for wrongful accusations.

Needless to say the idiot said fair enough I will come back with the police but never did.

No one is saying your intentions are less than honourable, you may well be an exception, but the simple fact is the RSPCA is rife with power hungry morons who will do and say anything they wish to get their own way and that is just clearly NOT acceptable in a law abiding, animal loving society.

_________________

Mmm, difficult one this...... no organisation, and surely no charity is perfect, certainly no charity is just doing what they do out of the goodness of their hearts. But in all fairness, this is generalising a bit too much, and forgetting the many good people such as shebajet who do care about animals, and who do try their hardest with limited resources to try and save as many animal's lives as possible.

The issues around complaints, and salaries of CEO's, are not just RSPCA issues, but related to every charity out there, so is it really fair to single the RSPCA out on here?

I have had some personal dealings with them, and my experience was positive, so two sides to each coin....

I'm not getting into anymore arguments, but I would like to clarify a few points. The most important is that I must hold my hands up to one mistake - about the right of entry. The RSPCA have no automatic right of entry, but the police rarely refuse to attend if any animal is in genuine distress, so in some circles, it is considered a "right". My apologies.

1. "Is it untrue that the RSPCA have stated that they will only accept "RSPCA generated" animals in future? Or was that just a way of trying to imply it was untrue without actually stating so?". I did not say that this was untrue nor did I imply that it was untrue - I just said WHY this was likely to be the case.

2. ALL RSPCA Inspectors (note - Inspectors, not AWA's or AWO's) are employed by the RSPCA who is an independent charity and therefore the Inspectors are not council officials.

3. "Well without a charities ombudsman even the charity commission admit there is nowhere other than the massively expensive legal route for people who feel aggrieved.". As I said - I agree with you on this point, but should those who give their money to charity be forced to pay for another Government-funded Quango? We pay enough taxes as it is.

4. "And no, I can't say how much the new RSPCA chief executive will be paid - the RSPCA have not told anyone yet!" - Funnily enough I don't know either. I completely disagree with the CEO being paid lots of money, as are nearly all CEO's of any major association.

5. "being ordered ordered to kill their animals" The RSPCA (as an organisation) do not order the inspectors to kill animals, nor do they tell people to kill their animals. The only exception to this rule is a dog under the DDA - and this situation would also have to apply for the Police if they came across a dog under the DDA; also any animal that has been injured to the point of it not being able to survive, then it is the kindest thing to do.

Many may not be aware but during the summer, the Government banned the RSPCA (or any other animal rescue organisation) from using a drug that is used to humanely PTS an animal in distress, for any wildlife. This meant that the Inspectors had to use alternative (humane) methods to releive suffering for terminally injured wildlife by trained officers; or face the extra time and costs involved in taking the animal/s to the vet for more humane end. This has since been rescinded.

6. "Approaching the RSPCA for information or to complain is a total waste of time." - Have I offered you the chance to put your situation and comments forward? Yes. And I would make sure that you received an answer. Our council is made up of volunteers from different branches and we in no way "bow down" to the RSPCA society. Yes there are guidelines, but any genuine complaint or request for public information will be treated with respect and a full response given.

Finally - Fenris. You state that you have "no time" to introduce yourself, yet you found the time to jump on this forum and post some very long comments (including links which must have taken time to find), as well, IMHO, a personal attack against me and my beliefs, yet you do not know me - why?

Well done for finding a home for the dog & cat btw - that is a really good thing to do - and that comment is in no way meant in any way other than genuine thanks and relief that these two animals have found a loving new home.

In the past 12 months, I have been involved directly with the re-homing of over 200 animals (dogs, cats, rabbits and rats) and indirectly involved with many more.

As my committee role is very important to me, and I beleive that at a local level, I can make a difference, however small. Every small step leads to a long journey.

And fenris - I am not "hurling insults" any more than you are - I was just making a point. I do not belive in personal insults on a public forum, as stated earlier, but feel that there must be 2 sides to every debate. Please can we just put this matter to one side with both parties having valid points, and both knowing that there is very little we as individuals can do to change the "powers that be" at the top - no matter how much we try.


Louise - thanks and I'm sorry to hear about the incident with the Inspector. As I guess this was with the SPCA, there are some minor differences because of Scottish Law - but not being an expert in either I would hate to even comment, but I agree that they whole animal welfare system does need a really good shake up.


Anyway that , from me anyway, is all for now on this subject. I hope that it will be closed for now. Fenris, (and everyone else), I personally wish you a great Christmas and a Happy New Year.

_________________

_________________

Louise ....I have had a few dealings with teh SSPCA ...all there staff are professional and very helpful. Both when rehoming and the after care when I took the cat home. I also had to report a neighbours whose dog was tethered for 16 hours plus a day in the rain and wind and snow in the back garden ....they acted very quickly after getting enough evidence ...Dog siezed and removed. Its a completely different organisation.

_________________