# FOCAS guidance on RSPCA



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

*Following many enquiries recently regarding the legal powers of the RSPCA in view of the new Animal Welfare Act, FOCAS has issued the following guidelines:-*

*Know your rights!*​
*Do the RSPCA have the right to demand to inspect my animals, question me or my family?*

*NO: The RSPCA have no legal powers, or rights, over and above that of any other member of the general public. They are not Animal Welfare Inspectors under the Animal Welfare Act. *

*Can the RSPCA issue me with a formal ‘Improvement Notice’ under the new Act?*

* NO: Only an Animal Welfare Inspector can legally issue an Improvement Notice.*

*The RSPCA call themselves the Animal Police, wear a police-style uniform, have ranks (Inspector, Chief Inspector etc) & issue cautions, does this mean they are law enforcement officers?*

*NO: The RSPCA is a charity, not a statutory law enforcement agency. It is a serious offence to impersonate a police officer. The caution used by the RSPCA is taken from the **The Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) and can be used by anyone.*

*If I refuse to cooperate with the RSPCA can they arrest me?*

*NO: The RSPCA have no more powers of arrest than any other member of the general public. The caution used by the RSPCA starts with the phrase “You are not under arrest”, which implies they have the power to arrest, but this is not true. *

*Do I have the right to ask the RSPCA to leave my premises?*

*YES: The RSPCA must leave your premises at your request otherwise they commit the offence of trespass. The RSPCA have no more right to enter property than any other member of the public.*

*Do the RSPCA have the right to seize animals?*

*NO: Only a police officer or Animal Welfare Inspector appointed by the Local Authority can seize animals - the RSPCA have no power to seize or confiscate anything. *

*Can a police officer or animal welfare inspector seize animals and give them to the RSPCA?*

*YES: A police officer or animal welfare inspector can seize animals under certain circumstances and they can place the animals in the temporary care of the RSPCA. Police or animal welfare inspectors seizing animals are legally responsible for them.*

*If the police or animal welfare inspector seizes my animals should they give me a receipt?*

*YES: If the police officer or animal welfare inspector seizes your animals you are entitled to demand a receipt from them. Do not sign any receipt offered by the RSPCA.*

*Do the RSPCA have the right to be on my premises if named on a Warrant issued by a Magistrate?*

*YES: If a warrant has been lawfully issued by a Magistrate and it names the RSPCA then they have right of entry. *

*What do I do if the RSPCA want to inspect my animals or ask me questions, or say they have received an anonymous complaint about my animals? *

*In light of recent developments, and taking into consideration the RSPCA position against many lawful activities concerning animals, our advice is do not answer any questions verbally. Ask the RSPCA to put any questions in writing and inform them that they will be answered as soon as possible. *


*Call immediately for guidance *​_*Advice is free & in total confidence *_​​*FOCAS Helpline: 023 8044 0999 *​_Or_​*The Self Help Group: 1470 0870 072 6689*​


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

thank you Chris.
it would be a good idea for people to print this out so they can have it at hand should they need it.



gonna sticky this one .


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

*Valid Point*

But l would further suggest in todays rough sewn climate to actually have a couple of copies near your animals on the walls.

Nerys and l have this sort of thing in a few places, in bold large letters, so even if RSPCA are present, they too can see that we also know the Friggin Score.

R


----------



## madaboutreptiles (Jun 5, 2007)

Thats good stuff, now we know exactly where we stand legally with these idiots.


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

Can I just ask Chris please - it says a lot about the Animal Welfare Inspector.

How would people go about finding out who thier local AWI is?

Better the devil you know and all that


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

brittone05 said:


> Can I just ask Chris please - it says a lot about the Animal Welfare Inspector.
> 
> How would people go about finding out who thier local AWI is?
> 
> Better the devil you know and all that


Every Local Authority (council) is empowered under the Act to appoint an ‘Animal Welfare Inspector’. You can contact you council and ask them if they have appointed an inspector and if so who they are. Not all council will have done so, in fact many Council will not appoint an inspector as government has provided no funding for training etc. Nevertheless it is worth contacting your Council and asking if they have done so or if they plan to do so. One of the major issues with the Animal Welfare act is the lack of funding provided from government to Local Authorities to implement the Act.


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

Thanks Chris - so what would be the score if the local authority have not appointed an AWI?

I did read about the authority side on the AWA but didn't understand if they have't appointed an AWI, who does the owness of authority then lay with? Presumably directly with the authority?


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

Under the legislation there is no obligation for Councils to appoint Animal Welfare Inspectors, many will not do so in order to save funds. For many local authorities animal welfare is not high on its priorities, understandably. So as feared enforcement of the Act will default to the RSPCA. Even in areas where Local Authorities have appointed Animal Welfare Inspectors, such as here in Southampton, the Inspectors acts merely as the puppet of the RSPCA, using there authority to enter premises and then allowing the RSPCA to do as they wish.


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

Thanks Chris.

I think that is the major worry that councils do not put enough emphasis on Animal welfare because of funding.

May see if my borther in law can find out for me about our council and how they lay with it - although I know you recently commented on the poor woma who felt the brute force of the farce that is the RSPCA against her small wildlife rescue in Rock Ferry  - I presume that was so because our council did not have a officer appointed.


----------



## Faith (May 17, 2007)

umm let me get this right 
If there is no inspector appointed it lays with the rspca to put the AWA in force?
And if there is an inspector then they are responsibal for putting the AWA in force?

If the above is correct then do the rspca have the same rights as an animal walfare officer to enter properties, if there is no animal welfare officer appointed under the local council?


----------



## Issa (Oct 13, 2006)

Just outta curiousity do we have the same rights of the use of reasonable force to evict a trespassing RSPCA officer as we would a member of the general public?


----------



## brittone05 (Sep 29, 2006)

I would assume Faith that as the RSPCA are a "body" as opposed to an "individual" then they would have no further rights of entry UNLESS one officer was specifically designated the role of AWI?? (sure Chris will clear this up)

Issa - RSPCA or not, you have the right to use reasonable force on anyone who is trespassing on your property. They are only civilians as we are they have no more rights to entry as averga ejoe downt he street


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

brittone05 said:


> Thanks Chris.
> 
> I think that is the major worry that councils do not put enough emphasis on Animal welfare because of funding.
> 
> May see if my borther in law can find out for me about our council and how they lay with it - although I know you recently commented on the poor woma who felt the brute force of the farce that is the RSPCA against her small wildlife rescue in Rock Ferry  - I presume that was so because our council did not have a officer appointed.


I think it is understandable that animal welfare is not the top priority of local authorities, human interests superseding animal interests. After all humans vote and pay for the local authorities, animals do not! 

Animal welfare will only become a ‘priority’ for Local Authorities if constituents demand it, eventually I do believe that public pressure will force Local Authorities to appoint Inspectors. The big question I guess is will people (tax payers) be prepared to pay for this service! 

This is the difficulty and in reality the danger, you have the RSPCA offering to do the job for free!


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

Issa said:


> Just outta curiousity do we have the same rights of the use of reasonable force to evict a trespassing RSPCA officer as we would a member of the general public?


In short you have the same legal right to use ‘reasonable force’ to eject an RSPCA employee as you do any other member of the general public, because that is what they are – members of the public. However, I would urge some caution as the RSPCA would, I am sure, would not be pleased. The issue is what is ‘reasonable’ - a very tricky issue!!


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

brittone05 said:


> I would assume Faith that as the RSPCA are a "body" as opposed to an "individual" then they would have no further rights of entry UNLESS one officer was specifically designated the role of AWI?? (sure Chris will clear this up)


The RSPCA as a body, or as individuals have no more rights than any other member of the general public. They have no right of entry onto private property full stop.

Initially both we (and the RSPCA) expected the RSPCA to take the role of Animal Welfare Inspector. However, when it was thought through in detail it soon became apparent it would be a nightmare for the RSPCA as for one they would be accountable for there actions, at the moment the RSPCA are totally unaccountable to anyone other than themselves. As soon as it became clear they would be formally accountable they dropped the idea of becoming the Inspectors like a hot potato.


----------



## Faith (May 17, 2007)

Chris Newman said:


> The RSPCA as a body, or as individuals have no more rights than any other member of the general public. They have no right of entry onto private property full stop.
> 
> Initially both we (and the RSPCA) expected the RSPCA to take the role of Animal Welfare Inspector. However, when it was thought through in detail it soon became apparent it would be a nightmare for the RSPCA as for one they would be accountable for there actions, at the moment the RSPCA are totally unaccountable to anyone other than themselves. As soon as it became clear they would be formally accountable they dropped the idea of becoming the Inspectors like a hot potato.


So what your saying is if we have no appointed AWI then we just dont have one. The RSPCA are not a replacement for an AWI if the council have not appointed one?

Another quick question, 
If we have what people normally know as a "dog warden" which i believe under the council i live in is now called an "animal warden" is this the same as an AWI?
Thanks for answering the questions Chris
And yup id be willing to pay a few extra pennies a week for a "knowledgeable" inspector


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

Faith said:


> So what your saying is if we have no appointed AWI then we just dont have one. The RSPCA are not a replacement for an AWI if the council have not appointed one?
> 
> Another quick question,
> If we have what people normally know as a "dog warden" which i believe under the council i live in is now called an "animal warden" is this the same as an AWI?
> ...


Basically that is correct, if you don’t have an Inspector, you simply don’t have one – there is no obligation for a council to appoint one.

It is entirely plausible that the dog warden has been appointed as the Inspector, prior to the Act coming into place many local authorities took the proactive step of turning ‘dog wardens’ into ‘animal wardens’, I assume these would now be know as Animal Welfare Officers, you need to phone your council and ask.

Now “knowledgeable” Officers/Inspectors, now that is an entirely different can of worms. Animal Welfare inspectors could be appointed from the ranks of dog wardens, as discussed. Or Environmental Health Officers or Licensing Officers, none of them need to have the slightest knowledge or interest in animals, its simple a task they preformed. 

The same applies to RSPCA inspectors, to be an inspector the only thing you don’t need is any knowledge or practical experience with is animals!


----------



## Faith (May 17, 2007)

Chris Newman said:


> Basically that is correct, if you don’t have an Inspector, you simply don’t have one – there is no obligation for a council to appoint one.
> 
> It is entirely plausible that the dog warden has been appointed as the Inspector, prior to the Act coming into place many local authorities took the proactive step of turning ‘dog wardens’ into ‘animal wardens’, I assume these would now be know as Animal Welfare Officers, you need to phone your council and ask.
> 
> ...


oh well that sounds just great .....Not

havent met the "animal warden" for our council as yet, met the one for where we used to live and was nicely suprised to know that he knew a little about some reps and didnt mind being educated about them either 

Just and out of the blue question
Do the same things apply to people that own their own homes? as it does to people that live in council housing? 
what i mean is do home owners have different rights as to who is on their property and when or is it the same for everyone?


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

Faith said:


> oh well that sounds just great .....Not
> 
> havent met the "animal warden" for our council as yet, met the one for where we used to live and was nicely suprised to know that he knew a little about some reps and didnt mind being educated about them either
> 
> ...


In terms of the Animal Welfare Act it doesn’t matter if you own the house or not, the legislation is the same.


----------



## arkreptiles (Sep 26, 2007)

On a similar point...as I understand it the AWA which received royal consent earlier this year is effectively an enabling act and a number of further issues are to be addressed by way of statutory instruments (SI's).

One of these issues related to animals being kept in 'suitable' enclosures which has led many to think that it might prejudice the keeping of reptiles in rack systems or any form of 'tub'.

Are there any groups that I could contact with a view to lobbying those that are drawing up these SI's? The main concern being that a blanket provision is enabled without taking account of the species.

I believe that it is right to legislate on this area and it could be extremely positive. If it is done properly it could take a long time as I believe it should be species specific.


----------



## Faith (May 17, 2007)

Pro Keepers' Lobby: 'Left Wing Right Politics' -- Home to Pro Keepers' Alliance

Are the people fighting legis for all types of animals including exotics 
Fighting for our rights to keep pets etc there are a good bunch imo


----------



## arkreptiles (Sep 26, 2007)

Faith said:


> Pro Keepers' Lobby: 'Left Wing Right Politics' -- Home to Pro Keepers' Alliance
> 
> Are the people fighting legis for all types of animals including exotics
> Fighting for our rights to keep pets etc there are a good bunch imo


Thanks Faith - signed up today!!!! They do seem a little too aggressive though....


----------



## Faith (May 17, 2007)

lol not at all 
They have been fighting for rights for a while and i spose can at times come across like that but you will find there are quite a few members on here that are also supporting the PKL just look at some of their sigs


----------



## arkreptiles (Sep 26, 2007)

Faith said:


> lol not at all
> They have been fighting for rights for a while and i spose can at times come across like that but you will find there are quite a few members on here that are also supporting the PKL just look at some of their sigs


Good thing too by the sounds of it!! All I was getting at is maybe a more considered approach might be appropriate to achieve a sensible outcome - we can live in hope!!


----------



## Nerys (Apr 18, 2005)

us? aggressive?

:whistling2:

thing is nick, that in order for our voice to be heard, we have to shout above the mumblings of all the people who like to complain, but do nothing else. 

the great hordes of exotics keepers who like to shuffle in silence when we say "hand up who wants to volunteer for..." everyone is so fast to talk about their rights.. their freedom.. but why suddenly everyone is too busy to put their money where their mouth is and fight for their rights and freedom? some 200+ members of pkl are proving that at least partly wrong. but for crying out loud.. 200 out of how many exotics keepers? in the main you guys are just pathetic.. you like to whinge and whine about things like the rspca.. sure they may be wankers, but they are organised and efficient at their wanking and thats the truth. they have acheived more against us, than 95% of you will ever realise, and by the time you do? too late my friends, you will be too late.

we have a proactive stance yes, but we are not truely agressive when compared to the likes of the groups we are up against.

our approach is considered yes. we have to consider which buttons to press, to get something noticed. for sure we cannot please all of the people all of the time.. in honesty the Antis found the "don't get fisted" banner hilarious.. it was more our own side who did not get THAT joke (sods law really!) nothing is done without a reason, a time for everything, a season for it all.

PKA, the pro keepers alliance, is a softer version than PKL, the pro keepers lobby. PKA is more designed for people who want to support, but are not able, for whatever reason, to support the more proactive arm of PKL.

we are oft accused of scaremongering and rumour running. this is, in the main, as we cannot grass up those informers who we have managed to get..

there are things i can tell you, that would lead right back to showing who has told us, and that would get them in hot water, and lead to less information coming over to us, so many times we have to word things carefully, without being able to give a real source - leading some to bleat about "pkl scaremongering ra di ra di ra" like the sheep they sound like, they will be fleeced soon enough by those they think are powerless to stop them

over the last week or so, we have learnt all sorts of worrying things, none of which we are yet able to come out and say outright, but all of which have been alluded too recently in various posts on here. 

a great part of me, tbh, sits here with my head in my hands and thinks.. oh god, if only you knew.. sometimes its enough to drive one over the edge, round the twist, up the bend, and into the loop the loop.

i know, in my heart of hearts, that not enough of you will listen, and even fewer will do something about it. those who have, when the shit hits the fan in the next few years, will at least be able to look back and think "i tried" . as to the rest of you, well, tbh, you deserve what is coming. good luck to you all, we will be needing it.

Nerys


----------



## Andy (Jul 27, 2005)

Nerys said:


> as to the rest of you, well, tbh, you deserve what is coming. good luck to you all, we will be needing it.
> 
> Nerys


Maybe if people knew what was coming they would be more inclined to do something. I cant help but get bored of reading the same old thing from the PKL and not seeing any thing of substance. I know you have to protect your sources etc but what good is this info if you cant tell the people who it will affect the most? Oh well i will get my head back in the sand and await a flaming from the PKL lobbyists!:lol2:


----------



## Faith (May 17, 2007)

Andy said:


> Maybe if people knew what was coming they would be more inclined to do something. I cant help but get bored of reading the same old thing from the PKL and not seeing any thing of substance. I know you have to protect your sources etc but what good is this info if you cant tell the people who it will affect the most? Oh well i will get my head back in the sand and await a flaming from the PKL lobbyists!:lol2:


i think if you read all of the posts collectivly from the people at pkl then you would get the general idea 
ive got the general idea and to be honest im not the brightest light in the house. 
and ill agree with you andy in the respect that if everyone could be bothered to find out a bit for themselfs and do their research then they wouldnt have to be spoon fed information from the likes of pkl its about time we started thinking for ourselfs. And standing up for what we believe in


----------



## Nerys (Apr 18, 2005)

Andy said:


> Maybe if people knew what was coming they would be more inclined to do something. I cant help but get bored of reading the same old thing from the PKL and not seeing any thing of substance. I know you have to protect your sources etc but what good is this info if you cant tell the people who it will affect the most? Oh well i will get my head back in the sand and await a flaming from the PKL lobbyists!:lol2:


tbh andy, i don't really give a flying Flip if you get bored of what we write or not.

as said, see my post above yours.

if we coud tell you, we would, but by pandering to people like you who just want the gossip, we risk our sources integrity. and sorry but you have done nothing to prove you are worth doing that for.

Nerys


----------



## CBR1100XX (Feb 19, 2006)

Nerys said:


> tbh andy, i don't really give a flying Flip if you get bored of what we write or not.
> 
> as said, see my post above yours.
> 
> ...


If you only knew what I knew you would be shocked. I would tell you but I have to save it for another day.: victory:


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

Hi Nick, 

Pro Keepers Lobby will be seen as aggressive this is true.

Pro Keepers Alliance is for the keeper.

We were asked not long back to identify ourselves, and that is a process that is not just achieved overnight for it must be thought out for it to be seen in a sensible approach.

Originally, we were going to be seen to form a support group for FOCAS, in recent times, this has been addressed more closely and this is not right for us. 

We are there for the keeper. There are those keepers who do wish to be seen as pro active, and there are those whom wish to be seen to support but not as the aforementioned stance, but support.

Are we aggressive? 

NO, but we are, all, and should be seen to be passionate about what we keep.

Having said this, we are out there, more so than most of the societies, more so than the federations.

The time for quiet approach is gone, the time for direct assault is upon us. This does not mean that we are militant in our approach but it does mean that we are sick and tired of everything that is being thrown at us.

We can no longer afford to sit back and allow the 'others' to do all the leg work.

If an inch of the foot high proposals set for next year become a reality and is looking like they will now, then those that keep exotic pets, animals companions are in for one hell of a ride, to which they may never return whole again.

So many of you all talk of your passions, your freedoms, your rights - but do you really understand what that means to those whom oppose what you keep in the very first place? Really, l fear not!

Emigration is a word l have heard in a serious term often this week. The stresses alone on certain parties this week alone has been significant to both prove and verify that the shit is hitting the fan!

Are_ we_ going to sit back and watch - NO _we_ are not, what the 'others' may do well.....?

Who are our enemies?

Well guys and gals who isn't?

The RSPCA are predom our main one, not the local centres the highers, the AR groups are against us all, apathy is always against us, ignorance fools no one except those displaying it.

I could go on, as you know l can, but l will not.

Time is no longer with us, for now l truly believe the toughest battles will start to commence, and l seriously do not think we will pull through. I will not give up, for l do believe that people will wake up when it all starts, but as to whether that will be too late, l dont know, little time will tell l guess, wont it?

Rory


----------



## Nerys (Apr 18, 2005)

fazer600sy said:


> If you only knew what I knew you would be shocked. I would tell you but I have to save it for another day.: victory:


yeah, as said.. above..

just you wait sunshine, you will not be smiling about it for long..

i would love to think we are wrong, because if we are not, you are all screwed tbh!

N

to be brutally honest.. it will be a great sadness if all we have been told this week comes to pass.

but my GOD will i smile when the smug grins are wiped off faces like yours and andys. karma mate, what comes around goes around.. why fight for those who don't fight with us ?

N


----------



## CBR1100XX (Feb 19, 2006)

Nerys said:


> yeah, as said.. above..
> 
> just you wait sunshine, you will not be smiling about it for long..
> 
> ...


:lol2::lol2: I do not need you to fight for me at all. Please don't ever think that I do. If things changed tomorrow it would not wipe the smile off my face. Really why would it??


----------



## Andy (Jul 27, 2005)

Nerys said:


> but my GOD will i smile when the smug grins are wiped off faces like yours and andys. karma mate, what comes around goes around.. why fight for those who don't fight with us ?
> 
> N


Thats exactly why i would never join the PKL, one little comment against it at you get stroppy. Just wait till the anti's get hold of it. I am a member of other groups and have been in contact with my MP,the RSPCA and other more recognised groups about all this so dont get on your high horse and tell me I aren't worth fighting for. I am glad you will smile when it all goes tits up just because you have proven people wrong at least someone will be happy.


----------



## Faith (May 17, 2007)

Andy said:


> Thats exactly why i would never join the PKL, one little comment against it at you get stroppy. Just wait till the anti's get hold of it. I am a member of other groups and have been in contact with my MP,the RSPCA and other more recognised groups about all this so dont get on your high horse and tell me I aren't worth fighting for. I am glad you will smile when it all goes tits up just because you have proven people wrong at least someone will be happy.


what do you mean by in contact with the rspca?
Do you mean you support what they do and stand for ?
Just a question cus im nosey


----------



## arkreptiles (Sep 26, 2007)

Hi Nerys/Rory

Don't get me wrong, I applaud what you are doing as we will all agree that there are some out there that abuse their right to keep animals and that is to the detriment to those of us that advocate and propogate good husbandry. I, for one, would like to do what I can to assist.

It is my experience that influencing legislation is best achieved through proper dialogue and a coherent and professionally backed case and proper lobbying. Far better to be seen to embrace the sentiment of the legislation and suggest ways to 'improve' it rather than be purely seen as 'left wing' banner wavers and soundbite experts.

I am however at a disadvantage here as I am not privvy to the information you are and appreciate why it is not currently in the public domain.

Whilst many of us will also agree that proper legislation is a good step to ensure a framework for all to follow in keeping animals, the legislators certainly need educating so that a sensible and enforcable set of statutory instruments is enabled.

This is, in my opinion, where we come in. Abusing bodies such as the RSPCA (whatever we may think of them) and others and using expletives to describe their behaviour will not advance our cause.

There appear to be many suggestions that we all abhore but there do seem to be (in generality) some more sensible ones.

For example, the keeping of animals in 'suitable' conditions. This would provide a framework for all to follow that all sides of the argument would benefit from. However, what is needed is a species specific code. Such a code would clearly require the collection and assimilation of an enourmous amount of research which (I suspect) the legislators would find an irritation and indeed too time consuming to consider. It is our job to convince them otherwise.

Similarly, the suggestion that many european species must have 'certificates of origin'. This would work well if it were to take effect from some date in the future but not retrospectively - if it is retrospective then we could have a scenario whereby mass culling would be necessary which amounts to genocide - clearly something we want to avoid - again this is where we need to provide a voice of reason.

Perhaps we should be advocating a 'self regulation' code whereby all retailers and breeders who sell their offspring not only provide caresheets and certificates of origin (if bred by them) whether currently required or not but also ensure that those they are selling to are capable and have the correct equipment to do so. I know many already do this but if we *ALL *did it then the anti's would start to understand that we are responsible, professional and caring keepers of our animals that need less legislation not more.

As to the more abhorrent issues that appear to be emerging it is difficult for me to comment without more detail but again a reasoned response and lobbying through the correct channels ought to have more effect than banner waving.

Ignorance as they say is bliss and clearly many of the ideas being pushed into this debate are being provided by people with a lack of understanding of the issues predicated on the assumption that none of us wishes to keep our animals in a proper and responsible manner.

Let's prove them wrong .... I thought a prominent MP once said it's all about education, education, education .... well it certainly is and it's our job to do it!!!

Nick


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

Andy said:


> Maybe if people knew what was coming they would be more inclined to do something. I cant help but get bored of reading the same old thing from the PKL and not seeing any thing of substance. I know you have to protect your sources etc but what good is this info if you cant tell the people who it will affect the most? Oh well i will get my head back in the sand and await a flaming from the PKL lobbyists!:lol2:


You have a good point Andy, and for one l do wish l could find a way without the use of propaganda to deliver the facts direct, and if l can this forum will be the first to read it all.

As to flaming, nope, l dont have the energy and every reader is within their perrogative to believe or not, that is a fact.

Rory


----------



## Andy (Jul 27, 2005)

Faith said:


> what do you mean by in contact with the rspca?
> Do you mean you support what they do and stand for ?
> Just a question cus im nosey


Yes I support the normal everyday hard working people at local rescue centres.: victory: They have pets like the rest of us and work hard getting rescues up to good health and rehoming them. I dont like seeing them all tarred with the same brush as animal hating extemists trying to take over the world. I am sure the people in the higher echelons of power in the RSPCA do have hidden agendas but the people at the bottom are just animal lovers like you and me.


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

nicklamb said:


> Hi Nerys/Rory
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I applaud what you are doing as we will all agree that there are some out there that abuse their right to keep animals and that is to the detriment to those of us that advocate and propogate good husbandry. I, for one, would like to do what I can to assist.
> 
> ...


You write verse exceedingly well Sir.

And you are right.

On many of the points you raise, you are spot on.

What l think has caused major problems this year, has been certain legislations have been passed and they have caused us immense problems. For those whom regulate have not given apt considerations to their deliverance.

What we face in the new years to come, will show that we sadly do not have a voice.

We do not have the amassed finances our opponents have, nor their efficiency, nor their energy, nor their support, nor their organization, their structure, their make up, their list is endless.

Everything we do is almost covert now and this is wrong, for it can be only perceived as scaremongerous and rumour dwelling. And that is truly understandable.

Now - we are looking at legislations that will quite possibly change everything we do for our futures.

The RSPCA are in the main [locally] not bad, their branding is superb, their nucleus of energy is well devised and advised, the head quarters play to a different agenda to the local centres whom are self funding, where as the h/q is nationally funded.

Overall, l agree with what you have written, beautifully said, and l shall pop you a welcome email later.

Rory


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

Andy said:


> Yes I support the normal everyday hard working people at local rescue centres.: victory: They have pets like the rest of us and work hard getting rescues up to good health and rehoming them. I dont like seeing them all tarred with the same brush as animal hating extemists trying to take over the world. I am sure the people in the higher echelons of power in the RSPCA do have hidden agendas but the people at the bottom are just animal lovers like you and me.


Well said , l agree with you on this post.

Rory


----------



## Fixx (May 6, 2006)

This hasn't come from the same source that told you about the imminent RSPCA campaign against keeping skunks is it Rory?


----------



## CBR1100XX (Feb 19, 2006)

Fixx said:


> This hasn't come from the same source that told you about the imminent RSPCA campaign against keeping skunks is it Rory?


They are not trying to ban skunks as well now are they. I will have to stop paying my membership as they didn't tell me that one.:whistling2:


----------



## Faith (May 17, 2007)

Andy said:


> Yes I support the normal everyday hard working people at local rescue centres.: victory: They have pets like the rest of us and work hard getting rescues up to good health and rehoming them. I dont like seeing them all tarred with the same brush as animal hating extemists trying to take over the world. I am sure the people in the higher echelons of power in the RSPCA do have hidden agendas but the people at the bottom are just animal lovers like you and me.


agreed Andy  well said yup most of the "ground workers" are just lots of animal lovers that would like to see them cared for correctly


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

Perhaps it might be helpful if I explain how the RSPCA works. The RSPCA is not just one organisation, it is many. The inspectors are employed by the RSPCA which is based at Horsham, this is the main body of the RSPCA and any monies donated to the RSPCA go there unless specifically specified by the donator. 

RSPCA centres are in fact separate charities affiliated to the main RSPCA, the centres receive NO FUNDING from the main body and in fact have to pay for the privilege of using the name RSPCA. There are over 100 separate charities which use the RSPCA name.

The inspectors and animal collection officers are employed by the main charity based at Horsham. To be an inspector you do not need to have any knowledge about animals, here is a comment on this issue from the head of the inspectorate back in 2005:

*AF*_ gave an overview of the work of the inspectorate. In his view the inspectorate did not target certain species but acted largely on complaints. He recognised that the inspectorate did not have an in depth knowledge of animal husbandry and their main area of expertise was animal legislation. _

The policy of the RSPCA, to which all inspectors must comply, is set by the RSPCA Ruling Council. In 2005 it was alleged that 18 out of the 25 members of the Council were members of Animal Aid. When challenged on this point it was not denied by the RSPCA.

There are just over 300 inspectors, many are good dedicated people concerned with animal welfare. However, over the years there has been a growing number that’s main interest in Animal Rights, not animal welfare. 

One of the main concerns with the RSPCA is there is no accountability for there actions, either for inspectors or for the main body in terms of its prosecution activity. If you make a complaint against the conduct of an RSPCA inspector it will not be investigated, simply discarded. The only body to which the RSPCA are theoretically accountable is the Charities Commission, which is very limited in its areas of interest and is entirely impotent.

The RSPCA today is, I would suggest, an organisations out of touch, out of date and of control. Over the last few years more and more people have become critical of the RSPCA and its activities. They have in the last 5 years received more critical attention form the media, than they have in the previous 100 years combined, yet they remain resolutely obdurate to change. 

The RSPCA claim to be entirely funded by the general public, which they do to the tune of over £100,000, 000 [one hundred million pounds] annually. As the vale of respectability has begun to slip, how much long will the public support a body which is so palpable Animal Rights orientated!


----------



## arkreptiles (Sep 26, 2007)

Chris

It strikes me that at a grass roots level the RSPCA generally do a good job and are concerned with animal welfare. It appears however that the issue is with the umbrella organisation based in Horsham.

On the basis that they are a charity and hence answerable only to the charities commission in that respect, they are a law unto themselves.

Using the RSPCA as an acceptable public interface for animal rights activists is wholly wrong and a matter surely that could be taken outside of the charities commission to say a local authority or governement body that has the ability to investigate more thoroughly?


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

Nick,

In general I would agree the people on the ground do, or try and do a good job under difficult circumstances that is beyond question. It is also beyond question that we need the RSPCA. However, this must me tempered by having such a body that is accountable and not allowed to operate above the law of the land, as we see today.

The Charities Commission is unfortunately an entirely and inept body, and its only real remit is how charities spend there money. Other than that the RSPCA is unaccountable to anyone other than its self. Local Authorities would have little or no remit to investigate the RSPCA. The police do, but seem very reluctant to do so. For example I would suggest that the RSPCA commute theft on a very regular basis, i.e. taking animals which they have no authority to do. However, when you ask the police to do so they refuse. The difficulty is that if an RSPCA inspector takes an animal unlawful you cannot prove they intended to permanently deny the person of that property, i.e. they could return it (not that they do). 

There is no offence of car theft as such, which is why you have the offence of ‘taking and driving away’, because a joy rider may not intend to deprive the owner permanently of the car. I did one try and get an RSPCA inspector arrested for ‘taking and driving away’ when he unlawfully took a horse; unfortunately the police decided that a horse was not a vehicle – which I believe is incorrect, but still.

The RSPCA have been prosecuted in the passed for attempting to pervert the course of justice, and found guilty. They have also I believe been prosecuted for DWAA offences. However, what is really needed is a Public Enquiry into the conduct and running of the RSPCA, that is what I have been pushing for. In terms of the Animal Rights issue, Animal Rights is not unlawful as a philosophy.


----------



## arkreptiles (Sep 26, 2007)

Sounds like a call to a local MP is necessary although ours would be no good, he's a bit of a whet!!

Animal rights as you say are something to be fought for - it's more the perception the AR activists have that I have a problem with and their extremism.


----------



## sammy1969 (Jul 21, 2007)

I have just read this post all the way through and would like to thank Chris for all the information he has posted in regards to the rights of the RSPCA. Having been on the recieving end of their policy recently and still expecting to have problems from them in the future I can honestly say that I am now very disallusioned with the whole system of the RSPCA. 
I used to be a big supporter of the organisation and even had a good rapport with them and was a regular donator each month but all that has stopped as i know that they are not the caring sharing charity they claim to be especially when i see them turning a blind eye to pure animal cruelty and yet harrass and bombard myself saying i have no knowledge of the pets i keep and am not giving them their basic requirements each day.
I would love to be able to support fully the PKL but at the moment am not able to do so and am very worried about the new legislations that are looking to be implemented in the near future not only the keeper of pets but also for the pets themselves as i fear alot will be culled or realeased with out thought to the impact it will have on the animals or the enviroment.
I am a passionate person when it comes to the keeping of animals of all species and i know that alot of pet keepers are more than responisble when it comes to the keeping of their pets and always put the animals before themselves which is the way it should be but unfortunately as in so many other aspects of life their are those that do not care and give those genuine keepers a really bad name and those are the ones that have caused alot of the problems those of us that genuinely do care alot of problems we now face.
I do agree we need an organisation like the RSPCA to help with the fight with animal cruelty but know that the RSPCA has lost sight of its original dictate to prevent the suffering of animals and have in way become animal activists as mentioned in this post and this is not good for anyone, as Chirs suggests an enquiry into their practises is called for and should be fought for by all of us that care and hopefully this will happen soon and this is what i am pushing for as i can, I just hope that no one else has to suffer the way i have at the hands of the RSPCA in the future but i am sure this will not be the case

Sam


----------



## sammy1969 (Jul 21, 2007)

I have just read this post all the way through and would like to thank Chris for all the information he has posted in regards to the rights of the RSPCA. Having been on the recieving end of their policy recently and still expecting to have problems from them in the future I can honestly say that I am now very disallusioned with the whole system of the RSPCA. 
I used to be a big supporter of the organisation and even had a good rapport with them and was a regular donator each month but all that has stopped as i know that they are not the caring sharing charity they claim to be especially when i see them turning a blind eye to pure animal cruelty and yet harrass and bombard myself saying i have no knowledge of the pets i keep and am not giving them their basic requirements each day.
I would love to be able to support fully the PKL but at the moment am not able to do so and am very worried about the new legislations that are looking to be implemented in the near future not only the keeper of pets but also for the pets themselves as i fear alot will be culled or realeased with out thought to the impact it will have on the animals or the enviroment.
I am a passionate person when it comes to the keeping of animals of all species and i know that alot of pet keepers are more than responisble when it comes to the keeping of their pets and always put the animals before themselves which is the way it should be but unfortunately as in so many other aspects of life their are those that do not care and give those genuine keepers a really bad name and those are the ones that have caused alot of the problems those of us that genuinely do care alot of problems we now face.
I do agree we need an organisation like the RSPCA to help with the fight with animal cruelty but know that the RSPCA has lost sight of its original dictate to prevent the suffering of animals and have in way become animal activists as mentioned in this post and this is not good for anyone, as Chirs suggests an enquiry into their practises is called for and should be fought for by all of us that care and hopefully this will happen soon and this is what i am pushing for as i can, I just hope that no one else has to suffer the way i have at the hands of the RSPCA in the future but i am sure this will not be the case

Sam


----------



## Fixx (May 6, 2006)

Petition by Bird Keepers for a full accounting of RSPCA funds.


----------

