Thursday, 22 April 2010
RESCUE CHARITIES CRITICISE RSPCA
From next month 17 RSPCA centres are planning to prioritise animals which are "RSPCA-generated", meaning those seized by inspectors in cruelty cases or those at immediate risk. This means they will not necessarily take in pets which are merely unwanted
Animal centres, already oversubscribed due to the increase in unwanted or abandoned pets during the recession, have claimed this will place them under even greater strain, and could lead to more pets being abandoned.
Roy Marriott, chairman of Animals in Need, said: "I think it's absolutely despicable."It will just put more and more pressure on small organisations like us and we cannot cope as it is."
He added: "Everywhere up and down the country is absolutely full with animals. If the RSPCA aren't going to take them, where are they going to go?
"They will be dumped on the streets, passed around or taken to the vets to be put down, meaning healthy pets will be destroyed needlessly."
Tracy Cook, manager of Jerry Green Dog Rescue, said: "We already cannot cope with the number of dogs that need placement and we have a minimum two-month waiting list. The knock-on effect of this means we are going to have even more of a problem.
"What's going to happen when we can't take a dog for four, five or six months? I think it will have a huge impact on the number of dogs turned out as strays."
She said she believed the policy could end up being more costly for the charity, with the extra costs of cruelty cases compared to those of unwanted animals that are easily rehomed without expensive vet bills and lengthy kennel stays.
She said: "The RSPCA are such a big organisation, how on earth are the rest of us going to cope? They are a well-known organisation with a lot more backing."
Kate Geary, spokesperson for the charity, said the organisation was merely trying to "work smarter" and prioritise the most urgent cases over those where an animal was simply unwanted by its owners.
I have been for over 10 years concerned by how the rspca has changed and have feared that in reality the rspca only want to be a political animal rights organisation with the added power of being the Pet Police answerable to no one.
It appears that my fears have been compounded if a memo obtained by the media is to be believed. The rspca ( the 8th larges UK charity ) which had an income in excess of £119 million in 2008 has apparently stated it will turn away stray or unwanted pets from animal shelters from next month to cut costs and focus on policing animal cruelty.
The excuse given is due to both an increase in the numbers of abandoned pets ( this since the introduction of the rspca`s Animal Welfare Act 2007 ) and that the rspca as suspected want to spend the public`s donations on Policing animal cruelty.
This could directly affect the welfare of at least 75,000 animals a year as our animal charity turns its` back on our beloved pets.
A new terminology " rspca generated " which means seized by inspectors in cruelty cases or those which are at immediate risk or cruelty will be the only ones handled by the rspca. So from May 4th Pets belonging to people who are taken into hospital, evicted from their homes or are simply unwanted or found as strays will from that date be turned away with people being told to contact Vets, The Police or your local Councils.
So as the responsibility of animal welfare in the eyes of the rspca has become somewhat selective the question needs to be asked " Do the RSPCA serve any real purpose ? " Simple answer NO. The rspca do not use their vast wealth for the real purpose it was intended and now the workload, expenditure and responsibility has just been simply dropped by the rspca and left for the independant sanctuaries, Police, Local Authorities, Vets and kind hearted people to address the increasing animal welfare issues forced upon us by this once good dedicated animal charity.
Many of us have warned of the decline in the RSPCA