RSPCA

Yes your right there

The Bells of Heaven

'Twould ring the bells of Heaven
The wildest peal for years,
If Parson lost his senses
And people came to theirs,
And he and they together
Knelt down with angry prayers
For tamed and shabby tigers
And dancing dogs and bears,
And wretched, blind pit ponies,
And little hunted hares.

Ralph Hodgson

anno thanks for posting this I found it really touching.

What a lovely poem. It brought tears to my eyes.

I had thought that it was 'Shamed and shabby tigers' - but when I looked it up, I realised I had been wrong, though I do think it would have been equally appropriate.

Anno - wonderful, a first time read for me, and something to treasure.

On a less positive note, my feelings about the RSPCA are similar to those about the NSPCC - that is their self publicity is good, but the reality no-where near lives up to their view of themselves. We had several shire horses dying on their feet locally, ribs showing, feet overgrown, clear neglect The RSPCA were called out several times, and took no action, other than to make suggestions to the owner. This wasn't a case of someone who fell on hard times, and couldn't afford to feed them, or was having some kind of breakdown and so failed to care for them. This was a well known local brute (put simply). Matters were only resolved when a young, new qualified vet was asked to visit by a local riding school. The young vet set up a Facebook page, contacted the local papers etc. The horses were removed and taken to safety within 24 hours. What changed that the RSPCA could now act - only the publicity. This is only one small example. I also disliked the fact that the RSPCA spent large amounts of money defending the indefensible will. The morality if this issue was a big one anyway, but the court found for the person who should have inherited. The charity therefore lost the money and it's enormous legal fees.

Perfect, anno! Animal cruelty includes hunting as far as I am concerned.

RSPCA, don't get me started !!!

Whenever I had to try and contact them during my time as a vets assistant it would more often than not take several calls throughout the day before anyone answered the phone. When they did they weren't much help.

anno I have known that poem for years!

I contacted them once about a very obviously mangy and stray cat that kept hanging round the garden.....the only suggestion was that I should catch him?

They have been in the media a lot recently for the over zealous prosecution of cases where there was little or no real evidence of abuse or of the animal owner being unwilling to heed the advice they were given.

It has also been reported that they have pursued with unsubstantiated complaints of malpractice barristers and vets who have represented the defendants in these cases. One barrister said he had had to give up representing people accused of animal cruelty because his insurers had had to spend over £1 million defending him from a stream of malpractice accusations by the RSPCA, not one of which was upheld. Several vets reported similar accusations.

I do agree the RSPCA seems to have lost its way. It is the people at the top and the cutbacks which are making it very difficult for the employees and volunteers.

I don't know whether the RSPCA ever found its way In the first place. They have always had a completely unrealistic attitude to re homing animals, leading them to destroy thousands of healthy animals rather than place them in a less than ideal home. They have always preferred to prosecute people they don't agree with rather than concentrate on preventing or stopping animal cruelty, and they have always had a publicity machine that does not present the truth of what they do. I remember my dad being disillusioned by them in the 1950s so it seems things have been poor for a very long time. I think the only difference is that with the rise of technology the public is more aware of their failings and can see them for what they are.

The RSPCA has become too big for it's own boots, in my opinion. They no longer seem to care about the little ordinary animals or birds, in my experience. Twice I have sought their help and they have failed completely.
Love that poem, annodomini.

I think the problem with some animal charities, and some of the environmental ones as well, is that the management of them falls into the hands of the crusading self-righteous, who brook no opposition and, consciously or not, follow the communist mantra that the ends justify the means.

I think the problems with the RSPCA are many and varied but I don't agree that it is in the hands of the crusading self-righteous, more like the power-hungry with no principles at all. I think most large charities are now similar to the major political parties, where the position of head is seen as a career move rather than a calling based on beliefs.

nightowl, I agree with you in principle, but I do feel that while many charities may have personally ambitious managers, most of whom are, as you say, in charity management as a career. This does engender a healthy realism about their work and while they may not like their critics they tend not to see anyone who may not entirely agree with the charity and its operation as their worst enemy and the devil's spawn to be pursued t destruction at any cost.

Unfortunately I think that some animal charities and some environmental charities are run by such zealots who think that if you do not support everything single thing they say or do then you are utterly against them and their cause and must be destroyed by any means.

Well, I suppose the question that springs to mind is, "How would those that are dissatisfied with the RSPCA change it?"
I don't know much about it, but I imagine it has a huge brief, and minimal 'people on the ground' who are able to dash off hither and thither at every phone call. Financial resources depend upon donations, and inter-business connections I suppose, and these have to be managed.
There are lots of other animal charities out there to support.

I understood that the RSPCA was one of our richer charities. Too many people prefer giving to animal charities than to those for needy humans. the assumption is that animals are always grateful in their dumb way while humans are - well - human and can be argumentative and ungrateful.

I never give to animal charities, I abhor animal cruelty and, while not vegetarian, I buy the meat I do eat with animal welfare at the forefront of my mind when choosing what to buy and where to buy it. I am very wary of big rich high profile charities of all kinds and have a list of those I avoid giving to in favour of smaller more targeted charities.

I'm going back many years now, but a work colleague of mine had previously worked at the RSPCA Headquarters in Horsham (I don't know if it's still there). When some women came in asking that a campaign be mounted about the treatment of battery chickens, the officers at the RSPCA apparently thought it was hilarious. At that time I don't think people were generally aware or concerned about factory farming, but, still, we both thought that the RSPCA would have treated the matter more seriously even if they didn't think it appropriate to get involved in such a campaign.

At around the same time, another friend of mine found a kitten in the street. It was behaving very strangely - turning round and round. She took it to the RSPCA and explained that it was not her cat but that she had found it abandoned. The people there said it would need to be put down and then tried to apply pressure to her to pay for it - implying that it was her own cat and not a stray.

I have heard more recent stories from people about the likelihood of the RSPCA putting animals down rather than treating them. Of course, some animals are probably in such a poor state that there is no alternative but, having heard this from some small animal charities, it does make me wonder if there is some truth in it.

As to finances, I believe that the RSPCA receives a lot of money from donations.

Eloethan , I also believe they do , but I do think the people that donate think the money is going to be spent of the treatment of mainly domestic animals .

NOT prosecutions of Hunting people !

Nonu The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Isn't a pack of baying hounds chasing a fox round the countryside and then tearing it to pieces unnecessarily cruel?

I think, given the large amount of money this organisation receives, there should be room for campaigning and for treating animals. The title includes the word "animals", not "domestic animals" or "pets".

It appears most of your posts are correct according to this article

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3514829/Why-charity-set-fight-animal-cruelty-cruel-itself.html