I see the RSPCA are at it again...pushing a sob story to try an extricate money from either Joe Public or by taking any offender to court..
RSPCA appeal after pigeon dies from gunshot wound in Moreton.
Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, anyone who injures or kills a wild bird can face a fine of up to £5,000 and six months in prison. (doesnt apply to pigeons)
I see the RSPCA are at it again...pushing a sob story to try an extricate money from either Joe Public or by taking any offender to court..
RSPCA appeal after pigeon dies from gunshot wound in Moreton.
Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, anyone who injures or kills a wild bird can face a fine of up to £5,000 and six months in prison. (doesnt apply to pigeons)
Should people be able to harm animals and not get prosecuted??? Is it ok to maim any form of wildlife and leave it to suffer?
The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 DOES apply to pigeons, they are classed as a "Wild Bird" as per the act. Only a licensed person is allowed to perform pest control on pigeons and even then the licensed person and the person who contracted them have to ensure the complicated provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act have been obeyed.
I'm amazed how the media have managed to create this anti-RSPCA hysteria, the RSPCA do an amazing job at very low cost, suing newspapers is too expensive for them to even attempt, the newspapers know this and use them as easy prey to fill pages cheaply. The appeal is for information, not money!!!!!
Last edited by diggingdeeper; 12th Feb 20186:15pm.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
Well said Digging, the country needs organisations like the RSPCA .Its very worrying that some idiot is lose in Moreton with a gun .Hope he/she is caught & prosecuted.
Pigeons (feral and wood) are allowed to be killed (which also includes accidental wounding) under a Government General Licence (that is free and doesnt need to be applied for) and can be carried out by any "Authorised Person" (includes any landowner, homeowner..you dont need to be specifically licensed). Rules about discharging fire arms inc air rifles would apply.
Unfortunately animals will get maimed and suffer if they escape capture and dispatch.
Why do they want information....its publicity for them.
Look at the language used by the RSPCA person “I went to collect the bird’s body and there was a clear, severe injury in his chest.
“This poor bird must have been in a huge amount of pain and suffered a slow and agonising death.
“I made some enquiries in the local area and am keen to find out if anyone knows who may have been responsible for this awful act."
They are making it out to be an "awful act" , without information, when it may be a "lawful act" "a slow and agonising death".....do they do anything about kosher and halal throat slitting....
Ive just applied for a licence to trap red signal crayfish for food. Why..because they are overunning are waterways and destroying habitats. They will be dropped into a pan of boiling water. Is it cruel to eat meat???
The person clearly hadn't operated under the terms of a Government General Licence, therefore it comes back to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as the licence is not in place.
The person shooting pigeons with air rifles are the same calibre as idiots that have been shooting cats and people.
As long as you realise how slowly crayfish die in boiling water (over two minutes?), it is currently down your conscience how humane you think that is.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
Here's the latest thoughts on killing Lobsters and Crayfish and the like. Dropping things into boiling water and watching them thrash around from the pain , doesnt appeal to me at all l!!!
Nowhere near enough restrictions and checks on people obtaining air rifles . I dont believe they should be freely available to buy and sell on any ordinary sites including this one. Its all too easy for irresponsible idiots to get them and shoot how and what they want to. Should be far harder to buy them , and ownership notifiable to the police or something.
Here's the latest thoughts on killing Lobsters and Crayfish and the like. Dropping things into boiling water and watching them thrash around from the pain , doesnt appeal to me at all l!!!
Sounds to me that plunging them quickly into boiling water is probably the kindest way to do it. It would appear that thrashing around as you and I might is precisely what they DON'T do.
They have a decentralised nervous system, so killing them with a bolt through the brain is impossible anyway.
It strikes me that the RSPCA has money coming out of its ears, and has far too little to do with it. It is extremely badly run and is the only organisation that can bring private criminal prosecutions instead of simply gathering evidence for the police. Its inspectors are frequently overzealous, and can simply take your pet off you if they decide to although I believe this has recently been changed so that a vet has to be involved. I wonder how rational such an organisation can be when at least one of its trustees routinely likens farming to the Holocaust.
Sounds to me that plunging them quickly into boiling water is probably the kindest way to do it. It would appear that thrashing around as you and I might is precisely what they DON'T do.
They have a decentralised nervous system, so killing them with a bolt through the brain is impossible anyway.
They could be stunned before killing them as is done with many mammals.
Originally Posted by Excoriator
It strikes me that the RSPCA has money coming out of its ears, and has far too little to do with it.
That is a myth spread by the media. The RSPCA is short of funds hence having to put more animals down than they would wish. They have less than 12 months worth of realisable assets which considering the sources of income and the work they do, for a 200 year old organisation is not at all untoward. They near enough spend all that they earn.
Originally Posted by Excoriator
It is extremely badly run
That is a myth spread by the media, what they achieve for the amount of money they use is incredible, check the stats not the malicious words spread by the media.
Originally Posted by Excoriator
and is the only organisation that can bring private criminal prosecutions instead of simply gathering evidence for the police.
That is a myth spread by the media, the RSPCA have no extra powers compared to anybody else to bring private prosecutions.
Originally Posted by Excoriator
Its inspectors are frequently overzealous
That is a myth spread by the media, where is the evidence?
Originally Posted by Excoriator
and can simply take your pet off you if they decide to
That is a myth spread by the media, similar to the police they have to have evidence.
Originally Posted by Excoriator
I wonder how rational such an organisation can be when at least one of its trustees routinely likens farming to the Holocaust.
I can see the parallels.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
That's the problem with distributed nervous systems. You can't 'stun' them like a mammal with a brain. And who is to say this is significantly different from sudden heating of the nervous system anyway? Another alternative of freezing them seems to be equally ill-advised. They are cold-blooded and this causes them to slow down and appear 'stunned' in a way resembling stunned mammals, but again who is to say that the cold doesn't cause them to suffer more than heat?
The RSPCA seems deluded from top to bottom. It believes, for instance, it should be given the right to enter your property without the presence of the police if it believes an animal is suffering and approached parliament recently (with the aid of expensive lobbying companies) asking for this. Hopefully, it will be ignored.
It has an income of about £150 million a year from animal lovers fed a steady diet of lovable rescued puppies and kittens and doesn't hesitate to use this money to secure prosecutions for criminal behaviour. The police, by contrast, are required to submit evidence to the CPS before such a case can be pursued, which means they have to assemble and submit evidence for the charge. The RSPCA doesn't bother. There are many instances where the charge is unjustified and is lost, and some where the animal - having been taken by the RSPCA - has been 'lost'.
If you can't see the difference between a farm and a concentration camp, then you are well beyond my help, and I suspect anyone else's too.
That's the problem with distributed nervous systems. You can't 'stun' them like a mammal with a brain. And who is to say this is significantly different from sudden heating of the nervous system anyway? Another alternative of freezing them seems to be equally ill-advised. They are cold-blooded and this causes them to slow down and appear 'stunned' in a way resembling stunned mammals, but again who is to say that the cold doesn't cause them to suffer more than heat?
You can stun them with electricity if done properly.
Putting them in boiling water can take over two minutes to kill them, because they are cold blooded they can survive very high temperatures (but not boiling), for the boiling temperatures to travel to their nervous system takes time. We die of shock etc long before our nervous system gets boiled, many cold blooded creatures don't.
Originally Posted by Excoriator
The RSPCA seems deluded from top to bottom. It believes, for instance, it should be given the right to enter your property without the presence of the police if it believes an animal is suffering and approached parliament recently (with the aid of expensive lobbying companies) asking for this. Hopefully, it will be ignored.
Originally this function was done by the police, the Government decided to pass this function onto the RSPCA, the RSPCA are left with the responsibility but not the powers. Generally there is a good working relationship between the police and the RSPCA so its not an issue but on occasions the police are not available to assist with entry.
Normally anybody can burst into any property to stop a harm crime, if the RSPCA did this they would be lambasted even more, they are well and truly hamstrung and the media take full advantage for cheap press.
Originally Posted by Excoriator
It has an income of about £150 million a year from animal lovers fed a steady diet of lovable rescued puppies and kittens and doesn't hesitate to use this money to secure prosecutions for criminal behaviour.
Most work of the RSPCA is with wild animals.
The RSPCA only prosecute a very small amount of incidents, only in severe cases or where people have ignored previous advice are prosecutions attempted. They issue around 85,000 improvement notices a year, 98% of those require no further action.
Originally Posted by Excoriator
The police, by contrast, are required to submit evidence to the CPS before such a case can be pursued, which means they have to assemble and submit evidence for the charge. The RSPCA doesn't bother. There are many instances where the charge is unjustified and is lost, and some where the animal - having been taken by the RSPCA - has been 'lost'.
The RSPCA follow the prosecution procedure that the Chief Inspector of HM Prosecution Service recommended, do you think they should do the opposite? They are hamstrung in one aspect that the Government recommendation is that RSPCA inspectors become statutory inspectors, this is obviously beyond the control of the RSPCA.
The RSPCA only have 15 staff working on prosecutions and process about 1500 cases a year. I think you will find the success rate is pretty high at 92.5% which is significantly higher than the CPS at 83%. When you consider that the majority of RSPCA cases are subjective (the court has to decide if a crime has been committed as well as if the defendant is guilty) this shows they are probably erring on the safe side, most CPS cases do not have the subjective decision of whether a crime has been committed.
Originally Posted by Excoriator
If you can't see the difference between a farm and a concentration camp, then you are well beyond my help, and I suspect anyone else's too.
I didn't say there weren't any differences, I said there were parallels, in fact I would say there are many parallels.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
"I didn't say there weren't any differences, I said there were parallels, in fact I would say there are many parallels."
I would say there are none.
There is no intention of extermination from farmers, unlike concentration camps. Animals are treated well by good farmers, but very badly by 'good' concentration camp guards. Animals are neither starved nor left untreated if ill - both the norm in concentration camps Animals are bred in farms. Concentration camps sterilised their charges. Animals are farmed for money. Concentration camps cost money to run. In farms, the intention is to maximise profit, and that means the animals have to be treated well. The exact reverse of what goes on in concentration camps.
Any 'parallels' stem from a delusion that animals have (or should have) human rights which is total nonsense. Right are given in exchange for obligations and often need t be defended which animals cannot comprehend or fulfill.
None of this means ill-treatment should be allowed. It shouldn't of course, but establishing laws to prevent it (which I strongly support) doesn't involve conferring any 'rights' in the human sense.
Firstly the Charity Commission are not happy about the way the RSPCA is managing its public image, but of course, the problem here is that its public image is managed by the media who know the RSPCA can't defend itself and makes for easy cheap sensational press. Perhaps they don't lay on enough free drinks and gizzits to keep the media personnel happy?
Secondly, the RSPCA have dared to take on fox hunting and of course there are repercussions from those on high with friends in appropriate places.
In the past the triggers against them have been their stance on badger baiting and similar matters.
There is nothing else, all the rest is general-isms and meaningless words in the usual negativity from the media.
Any organisation dealing with over a million events a year are going to make a handful of mistakes or questionable judgements. There are going to be disagreements at board level (name an organisation where there aren't!). There are extremely few specific substantiated cases against the RSPCA but there are an awful amount of negative words from the media.
What is the alternative? Another organisation that would probably cost more and do no better?
The SPCA was formed in 1824 (becoming "Royal" in 1840) specifically because being a society enabled them to take out private prosecutions, that was their remit from day one where all other avenues of prevention of cruelty to animals were either thwarted or inappropriate.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
Heresay , but from a trusted friend . Sad to hear today of two fairly recent cases in Liverpool where the RSPCA seem to have fallen short of expectations. Both concern cats. First case was my friends relative whos next door neighbour died suddenly . He carried on feeding their two cats , anticipating that the deceased's family would take them once the funeral was over and house cleared. This didnt happen and the cats just got left . All pleas to take the cats fell on deaf ears at the RSPCA , they were just too full and said no .The elderly guy was left searching for homes himself. The same RSPCA refused to come for a cat with kittens that had been hanging around the property of another relative for over a week again, no space . Didnt hear the outcome of that one. I know they do their best , but Im glad they are making decisions not to fight expensive fox hunting cases if it means they can afford more inspectors. What are people supposed to do though when all rescues are full and even the RSPCA turns them away .
I must be reading this wrong, next door neighbour died suddenly, All pleas to take the cats fell on deaf ears at the RSPCA , they were just too full and said no .The elderly guy was left searching for homes himself.
The next door neighbour of the old guy died. The old guy carried on feeding THEIR cats. Come on assassin...the earthquake must have rearranged a few grey matter cells..
Just had a phone call from one of my customers (who is disabled) complaining about the neghbours 6 cats that are fouling the back entry he has to take his bins along..comes back covered in cat crap and walked it in his house..yuk . Already got him £20 worth of cat repellant stuff for his lawn which works but just moves the problem along. Wellies the next answer.
Yes, your are correct fish , but I probably could have put it more clearly . Two old people involved living next door to each other . One died and the other, my friends relative, was the one who ended up trying to home the cats.
Sad fact that the RSPCA has lost loads of income through the media hype and have had to make cutbacks. Cats generally find ways to be fed and if they aren't sick or malnourished are a low priority when it comes to rescue services. Very few cats that are let outdoors unsupervised are only fed by one household.
There are at least three cat rescue organisations that cover the Wirral and there are other animal organisations as well.
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
On the subject of cats , doing their business outside , my 2 daughters kitten nearly one , go,s out for a while , then comes in to toilet, WONT GO OUTSIDE , or do you mean feral cats .I FIND THE SMELL OVER POWERING ......... even with antibacterial cat litter .
My understanding is that the R.S.P.C.A do neuter feral cats if they are aware of them ?
However, it is also down to the 'servants' of domesticated cats to neuter them, too- lets stop this cycle of too many un-wanted kitties.
But how is the big question. The message isnt getting through. The attached file in your original post showing how one uneutered cat , breeding in yr one, can lead to over 2 millions cats by year 8 if neutering wasnt ever carried out on her & the offspring , demonstrates well why its false economy for the RSPCA to turn their backs on roaming cats with kittens in tow.( no matter if its feral or not) Totally agree with you its the owners responsibility to prevent their moggies getting pregnant . Trouble is, theres too many people who are oblivious to the bigger picture and just think how cute it would be to let their cat breed ' so the kids can see a birth etc ' and find it dead easy to find homes because they give them away to virtually anyone. Frequently the sort of recipients who took the kitten/s as a knee jerk reaction, often cant afford/dont bother to neuter ,didnt really think about keeping a cat longterm , chuck them out, etc etc and the cycle continues . Makes me even crosser than hunting because of the numbers involved -
Now I'm off to Google the R.S.P.C.A s stance on fox hunting!? Fox hunting disgusts me.
Im not sure what the latest position is, Im not up to date but I know theres been a lot of controversy over them spending thousands on prosecutions , and they have or are about to have a new CEO who has promised the charity will become less political , and concentrate mainly on domestic animals .I hate hunting too and want law breakers prosecuted , but it seems the RSPCA cant fund everything , and they seem to be treating it as an eithe/or situation.
Trouble is, theres too many people who are oblivious to the bigger picture and just think how cute it would be to let their cat breed ' so the kids can see a birth etc ' and find it dead easy to find homes because they give them away to virtually anyone. Frequently the sort of recipients who took the kitten/s as a knee jerk reaction, often cant afford/dont bother to neuter ,didnt really think about keeping a cat longterm , chuck them out, etc etc and the cycle continues . Makes me even crosser than hunting because of the numbers involved -
And the myth that its better for female cats and dogs to have one litter. Its simply not true, all the behavioural advantages of getting them spayed/neutered work even better the sooner they are done, likewise for the considerable reduced risk of cancer.
Originally Posted by venice
Im not sure what the latest position is, Im not up to date but I know theres been a lot of controversy over them spending thousands on prosecutions , and they have or are about to have a new CEO who has promised the charity will become less political , and concentrate mainly on domestic animals .I hate hunting too and want law breakers prosecuted , but it seems the RSPCA cant fund everything , and they seem to be treating it as an eithe/or situation.
The RSPCA can't do right for doing right, the media are permanently on the attack, if they reduce the fox hunting prosecutions to appease the media then they will be lambasted for that as well. In reality the prosecutions do not cost them a huge amount of money because most are successful and they get awarded costs, but that doesn't make good press does it!
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
New Ferry Park this morning:- "Absolutely no words. Feeling upset and distressed. My son has just come across a burnt dead cat in the park. Looks like some vile excuse of a human has set the poor cat alight and tried to put it out with the blanket. I have reported this to the RSPCA"
" Absolutely disgusting, so upset by this. My husband rescued a cat in Port Sunlight a few weeks ago as a group of youths were trying to attack it or catch it in a wheelie bin - my husband got hit in the face twice but atleast we rescued the cat, which happened to be our neighbours' who we know well"
Just two of many incidents, should the people that do these things not be prosecuted or should the message be to carry on doing what they are doing?
We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes. Charity is a failure of governments' responsibilities - Henning Wehn
"I didn't say there weren't any differences, I said there were parallels, in fact I would say there are many parallels."
I would say there are none.
There is no intention of extermination from farmers, unlike concentration camps. Animals are treated well by good farmers, but very badly by 'good' concentration camp guards. Animals are neither starved nor left untreated if ill - both the norm in concentration camps Animals are bred in farms. Concentration camps sterilised their charges. Animals are farmed for money. Concentration camps cost money to run. In farms, the intention is to maximise profit, and that means the animals have to be treated well. The exact reverse of what goes on in concentration camps.
Any 'parallels' stem from a delusion that animals have (or should have) human rights which is total nonsense. Right are given in exchange for obligations and often need t be defended which animals cannot comprehend or fulfill.
None of this means ill-treatment should be allowed. It shouldn't of course, but establishing laws to prevent it (which I strongly support) doesn't involve conferring any 'rights' in the human sense.
Its the ultimate betrayal to be looked after yet your " parent" then sends you to slaughter on a truck. But theyre just a commodity. Animal genocide outweighs ANY human atrocity ever. Billions die every year and its only mans ego thats asigned their lack of value. Empathy for dogs horses cats lions. Apathy for chickens cows pigs etc. This is at the heart of all our problems and why we will never be free of our violence to each other. Specieism is the tree from which racism homophobia sexism slavery etc etc etc branches from. As tolstoy said " as long as theres slaughter houses, therell be battlefields " Animals are sentient beings but we give them no rights cause WE say so. Not cause they dont deserve it. The WORSE species on earth & most destructive is the human. Yet we still follow the invisible man in an old book and in the sky. Were very dumb. You need to take time to listen " the greatest speech youll ever hear " on youtube by gary yourofsky. He speaks undeniable logic.
"I didn't say there weren't any differences, I said there were parallels, in fact I would say there are many parallels."
I would say there are none.
There is no intention of extermination from farmers, unlike concentration camps. Animals are treated well by good farmers, but very badly by 'good' concentration camp guards. Animals are neither starved nor left untreated if ill - both the norm in concentration camps Animals are bred in farms. Concentration camps sterilised their charges. Animals are farmed for money. Concentration camps cost money to run. In farms, the intention is to maximise profit, and that means the animals have to be treated well. The exact reverse of what goes on in concentration camps.
Any 'parallels' stem from a delusion that animals have (or should have) human rights which is total nonsense. Right are given in exchange for obligations and often need t be defended which animals cannot comprehend or fulfill.
None of this means ill-treatment should be allowed. It shouldn't of course, but establishing laws to prevent it (which I strongly support) doesn't involve conferring any 'rights' in the human sense.
Its the ultimate betrayal to be looked after yet your " parent" then sends you to slaughter on a truck. But theyre just a commodity. Animal genocide outweighs ANY human atrocity ever. Billions die every year and its only mans ego thats asigned their lack of value. Empathy for dogs horses cats lions. Apathy for chickens cows pigs etc. This is at the heart of all our problems and why we will never be free of our violence to each other. Specieism is the tree from which racism homophobia sexism slavery etc etc etc branches from. As tolstoy said " as long as theres slaughter houses, therell be battlefields " Animals are sentient beings but we give them no rights cause WE say so. Not cause they dont deserve it. The WORSE species on earth & most destructive is the human. Yet we still follow the invisible man in an old book and in the sky. Were very dumb. You need to take time to listen " the greatest speech youll ever hear " on youtube by gary yourofsky. He speaks undeniable logic.
Must have missed reading this at the time. --Great post Svenlock. You are ahead of your time--- a time Id love to see , but Ill die way before it comes, if it comes - human nature seems to be taking a turn for the worse atm from what I read and hear about. Selfish selfish selfish.
Never mind how anti-RSPCA you are, can you really think that someone that inhumanely dumps a sick pregnant horse should not be prosecuted?
Absolutely nauseating . New it was bad with lots of horses needing rehoming , but didnt realize the extent of the neglect and cruelty . Almost routine it would seem. Yes I think we have to prosecute such things.
