RSPCA POLICY NOT TO ACCEPT ABANDONED PETS

HOW THE RSPCA DEAL WITH LOST PETS

WHAT THE RSPCA DONT WANT YOU TO KNOW

Saturday 26 September 2009

MORE RSPCA LIES, THEY ARE NOT WHAT THEY SEEM !

THE RSCPA'S role as an independent animal welfare group has come under scrutiny after the charity made "untrue and unsubstantiated" claims in a national advertising campaign.
The Advertising Standards Authority delivered its judgement in response to complaints made by the Farm-ers Union of Wales.
The union accused the RSPCA of making misleading claims in a series of high-profile newspaper advertisements designed to solicit public support against possible badger culls.
As a result, the government's consultations on anti-bovine TB measures may be flawed, said FUW president Gareth Vaughan.
He added: "The ASA ruling should serve as awarning to all pressure groups that they cannot twist the truth to subvert a public consultation process for
their own blinkered ends."
Celebrities including actress Joanna Lumley, author Jilly Cooper, ex-Spice Girl Mel C and former newsreader Angela Rippon supported the RSPCA campaign.
According to UK rural ministry Defra, it received 47,472 responses to the consultation, most of which were campaign responses prompted by, and supportive of, the RSPCA stance.
The FUW's complaint centred on the charity's assertion that cattle-to-cattle transmission of bovine TB (bTB) was the main conduit for the disease, not badger-to-cattle transmission.
In its adjudication, the ASA said: "We considered the claim did not reasonably provide
readers with an indication of the caution and uncertainty among scientists and government advisers surrounding the relative importance of the two factors in bTB transmission."
The RSPCA acknowledged that badger-to-cattle transmission was a factor in the spread of bTB, and had simply intended to alert readers to the fact that the issue of bTB was not straightforward.




2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Further reply from the RSPCA ruling council:
It is not true to say the animal welfare groups you mention all agree that the captive bolt gun is inhumane. Its purpose is to render an animal immediately unconscious. If it does so there can be no cruelty. I have already stated that in my personal view more effort should have been made to find a future for at least some of the dogs. I was manager of the Ferne Animal Sanctuary in Somerset for seven years, and we took on rescues of animals that for various reasons, other organisations might have considered 'unhomeable'. Indeed some of our dogs were too dangerous to be re-homed with families, and they stayed with us for life.
It is of course open to you or anyone else to launch a private prosecution of the inspectors involved for cruelty. You could also campaign against the over-production of dogs by breeders and particularly 'puppy-farmers' who are responsible for the fact that there are too many dogs in the UK for the number of good homes available. In my personal view I would ban the breeding of all domestic animals of any breed until such time every rescue centre in the country was empty, but I doubt whether your supporters would agree with that. I can only repeat that I am extremely upset about this incident. Its impact is being felt by the RSPCA and no doubt by everyone involved. Lessons will have been learned. Regards, John Bryant.

Could enough money be raise to privately prosecute?

Anonymous said...

John Bryant. Perhaps you'd like to explain why the RSPCA have been wasting hundreds of thousands of pounds perusing their left wing tendencies?