PAYING THE RSPCA "PROTECTION MONEY" PAYS OFF

RSPCA TARGET AND PROSECUTE PET OWNERS FOR TRIVIAL MATTERS YET LET OFF FREEDOM FOODS PROTECTED FARMS FOR GREATER OFFENCES.

The RSPCA is inspecting two Norfolk farms where it is alleged pigs were mistreated, to ensure animal welfare standards are being maintained.
The farms belong to the East Anglian Pig (EAP) Company which suspended five employees after an internal inquiry.
The Animal Equality group released a film showing pigs being mistreated at Little Thorns farm near Swaffham.
The East Anglian Pig Company said it "totally condemns and does not tolerate animal mistreatment or malpractice".
A spokesman said: "We have carried out a full internal investigation following the release of historical edited film footage taken in December 2011.
"This has resulted in five employees being immediately suspended and subjected to disciplinary action.

"The RSPCA has confirmed that there are no grounds for prosecution."

££££ PROTECTION PAYS ££££

Little Thorns farm was immediately suspended from an RSPCA scheme called Freedom Food. The second farm has not been named.
An RSPCA farm welfare inspector has returned to the two farms to check pig handling, medical treatment and casualty slaughter practices.
The organisation said it would not comment any further because an investigation was under way involving its own experts, Freedom Food, a specialist pig vet and an animal welfare scientist.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-17861320

RSPCA RESPONSIBLE FOR MASSIVE WASTE OF PUBLIC FUNDS

• Comments
• Email
• Print
• Got a story?

RSPCA WASTE MORE PUBLIC FUNDS ON RIDICULOUS RESCUE 

DESPITE KILLING OVER 60,000 ANIMALS PER YEAR THE RSPCA ARE HAPPY TO WASTE TAXPAYERS MONEY ON A SEAGULL RESCUE, GOOD JOB THE FIRE BRIGADE COULDNT GET AT THE SEAGULL, THE RSPCA WOULD HAVE PROBABLY KILLED IT ANYWAY!

Several newspapers reported the “farce” of 25 firefighters rushing to the scene at Carshalton Ponds in the south London borough of Sutton  only for it to be deemed too dangerous for them to enter the waist-deep water.

However, the brigade’s response to the incident suggests the accounts have been wide of the truth.
It says that from a fire and rescue point of view the incident was a false alarm and was declared dealt with after just four minutes.
“The brigade was called to the scene by the RSPCA as an emergency and the brigade always takes calls from such organisations seriously. Firefighters arrived on the scene at 2.07pm and the incident was declared over at 2.11pm,” a statement on the brigade’s website states.
It continues: “The RSPCA called us out as an emergency. Our firefighters rushed to the scene only to realise they’d been called out to a seagull with a plastic bag round its leg which was swimming around quite happily and wasn’t in any distress.
“This clearly wasn’t an emergency so the firefighters left it to a local animal rescue charity to deal with and swiftly left the scene.
“Often, by the time our firefighters arrive at an incident, someone has waded in to try and rescue an animal only to get into danger themselves, so we send enough crews to deal with whatever we may find. The safety of the public and our firefighters is always our priority.
“Firefighters were not stopped from entering the water due to health and safety protocols.
“Just this week, LFB crews were called to rescue a man after the bulldozer he was driving fell 40 feet down into a quarry pit. When they realised the man’s life was at risk, the firefighters acted outside of normal procedures and risked their own personal safety to lift him out and save his life.
“London Fire Brigade’s firefighters are trained to make difficult judgement calls about when it is right to risk their lives in order to save another.”
http://www.london24.com/news/london_fire_brigade_says_seagull_rescue_health_and_safety_danger_reports_are_wrong_1_1348200

RSPCA TARGET POLITICIAN, IT GETS MORE DONATIONS!

RSPCA TARGET YET ANOTHER HARD WORKING COMMUNITY COUNCILLOR

A COMMUNITY councillor and his wife have been found guilty this week of the “large scale” neglect of nearly 60 animals at their home in Cilcennin.

CLLR SHELDON TARGETED BY RSPCA

Aberystwyth magistrates found 82-year-old Iain James Sheldon and Joan Sheldon, 68, of Cefn y Gaer, guilty of failing to meet the welfare needs of 57 animals following a four-day trial.
The couple were each handed a 24-month conditional discharge and ordered to pay £2,500 costs following an RSPCA raid in August last year in which officers were “over-powered” by the stench of urine, faeces and rotting meat.
But despite the guilty verdict, magistrates did not ban the Sheldons from keeping animals, and the RSPCA expressed concern that the animals may now be returned to them.
The court heard that RSPCA officers visited the defendants’ property on three occasions in August 2011 and conditions inside were described as “horrific” and “disgusting”.

The animals, including 36 dogs, 16 cats, four brown hens and a horse, were housed in a variety of kennels, caravans and outbuildings on the 4.5 acre smallholding.
http://www.cambrian-news.co.uk/news/i/24079/

DESPITE RSPCA "CASE" A CONDITIONAL DISCHARGE IS ORDERED

In England and Wales, a conditional discharge is a sentence vitiating the finding of guilt in which the offender receives no punishment provided that, in a period set by the court (not more than three years), no further offence is committed. If an offence is committed in that time, then the offender may also be re-sentenced for the offence for which a conditional discharge was given. Pursuant section 14 of the [[Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000] ^{[4] [5]} and R v Patel [2006] EWCA Crim 2689^[6] the conditional discharge does not constitute a conviction unless the individual breaches the conditional discharge and is re-sentenced.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discharge_(sentencing)

RSPCA TOTALLY IGNORE DONORS WISHES

The greatest joy in the life of animal enthusiast David Brown was the wild habitat he owned opposite his cottage that was home to foxes, badgers, hedgehogs and squirrels. So when he wrote his will, Mr Brown chose to leave his property to the RSPCA – a charity he trusted.
But the RSPCA repaid his trust by selling the land to property developers, and last week, to the horror of his former neighbours, the habitat was flattened – in just 12 hours.

Wildlife haven: Developers dig up the untouched land, a sanctuary for animals, against the wishes of the late David Brown

At least six trees, including two large oaks, were sawn down and the site reduced to muddy patch.
For Mr Brown had made one crucial mistake in drawing up his will – he expressed the ‘wish’ that the area be maintained as an animal sanctuary rather than making it a legal condition of the will.

This technicality allowed the RSPCA to ignore his wishes and instead cash in by selling both the cottage and the land for £295,000.
Neighbours suspected something might be happening when, a week before the diggers moved in, a plaque screwed to a tree in David’s honour was removed and attached to the side of his former cottage.
It read: ‘In loving memory, David, a good friend to us all. Not forgotten.’

Neighbours said Mr Brown used to feed badgers and foxes by hand, and wanted them to continue to live in peace on the plot

The RSPCA’s actions have caused fury among Mr Brown’s neighbours in Alderley Edge, Cheshire.
Paul Welton said: ‘I remember him coming to see me after writing his will and saying, “It will be safe now.” For him it was the most important thing. The RSPCA has ridden roughshod over his wishes.’

Julie Richards, who took in Mr Brown’s cat after his death in 2007, said: 'We thought leaving it all to the RSPCA was a fantastic thing to do. He has been badly let down.’

Mr Brown had given £3 a week to the RSPCA for most of his life.
Despite suffering dyslexia, the 61-year-old would write down things that were important. After his death, Ms Richards found a notebook in his cottage in which he had written his wishes for his estate.
It read: ‘The house cleared and sold – money for RSPCA for cats’ home. Antiques to be sold. ¼ acre of land to be left undeveloped, can be used for animals.’
Mr Welton added: ‘It was teeming with wildlife and fruit. David would feed the foxes and badgers by hand.’
Another neighbour, Mark Duffy, 48, a design consultant, said: ‘I think what they have done is illegal and I am going to challenge it.
A team of them arrived last Wednesday and started going for it like an army assault team. We all suspect that it is only a matter of time before they apply to build houses on it.’
Mr Brown’s elder brother, Geoffery, 71, who lives nearby, said: ‘It’s very sad that this land has been left bare when my brother wanted it protected. I am really very angry.’ It is understood that the RSPCA decided to sell the land in 2008. 

It was sold to companies connected to The Emerson Group, a development firm based nearby and owned by property tycoon Peter Jones.

The RSPCA, which also inherited £30,000 in premium bonds from Mr Brown, said: ‘Mr Brown wished us not to sell the land for building though this wasn’t a binding condition of the will. The RSPCA has used the money for its animals.’
Nobody from The Emerson Group was available for comment but a spokesman for East Cheshire Council said: ‘We are not aware of anything being done in breach of planning control.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2136714/Nature-lover-leaves-wildlife-haven-RSPCA--sell-bulldozed-built-on.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

RSPCA PROSECUTION CASE HALTED!

PETS ILLEGALLY SEIZED BY RSPCA?

A WOMAN who is accused of mistreating her 10 dogs could see the trial against her collapse because of concerns the animals were not seized lawfully.

Officers took the dogs from Charlotte Faulkner’s home in College Road, Hebburn, after RSPCA inspectors feared they were starving.
They were handed over to a vet who confirmed they were in poor condition and suffering from malnutrition, and ordered them to be transferred to the RSPCA’s care.
Faulkner, 47, denies four charges of animal cruelty.
But yesterday, during the second day of a trial at South Tyneside Magistrates’ Court, District Judge Roger Elsey threw the case into doubt.
The court had heard that police seized the dogs, which included adult and puppy King Charles spaniels, German shepherds, an Afghan hound and Pyrenean mountain dogs, using Section 19 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (Pace).
But the section says the dogs could only have been seized by police if they were already evidence in the case – and District Judge Elsey is concerned they might not have been until they were seen by the vet.
He said: “If the vet had examined the dogs at the house, there would be no issue about the lawfulness of the seizure.
“If there had have been a warrant to enter the house, it would also be a different matter.
“Miss Faulkner may have invited the police in, but they did not say they were there to seize the dogs, even though that was the intention.”
District Judge Elsey has now adjourned the case until May 18.
He has asked RSPCA prosecutor Alison Howie and Nigel Weller, defending, to submit their arguments for and against the case progressing before then.
He added: “If the rights of the individual and their property are going to be interfered with, it has to be in accordance with the law.
“And it may be the reality, in this case, that it unfortunately wasn’t.”
Previously, the court had heard from vet Honor Etherington that she classed all but one of the dogs to be very or severely malnourished after inspecting them.
Faulkner, who now lives in Edward Street, Craghead, County Durham, denies mistreating the animals.
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/crime/judge-halts-woman-s-dog-neglect-trial-1-4487888#

RSPCA FINALLY EXPOSE REAL AGENDA!

RSPCA PLEDGE 1

We pledge to end the overpopulation of companion animals and tackle the related issues.

http://www.rspca.org.uk/in-action/pledges/pledge1

RSPCA WASTE £ MILLIONS ON POLITICS, INTERNAL WITCH HUNTS AND OFFICES!

The RSPCA is one of Britain's richest charities. High profile animal welfare work by its uniformed inspectors ensures that it has a steady stream of income from donations and legacies.

Half of the £70 million it spent last year was on the 328-strong inspectorate and on prosecutions. But it is the way that money is spent elsewhere that has raised concerns.

The society has new headquarters near Horsham, West Sussex, and trustees complain of the mountains of paperwork produced by their bureaucracy.

Campaigns, including the drive against hunting, cost the charity £4,415,000 last year. Freedom Food cost £1,632,000 in direct grant aid, even though trustees have been repeatedly assured that it would be self-funding.

A council member said: "The problem is that the society has never had to worry about making money so hasn't had to worry about economising.

"Last year the AGM was in Newport and all the staff and council members stayed in the Hilton Hotel. At the end of the day it's a bed for the night and it's an animal charity."

However, an RSPCA spokesman said people could not be put in low-quality hotels and expected to do a good job. "There's a balance to be struck between looking after yourself and extravagance and I think we strike that well," he said.
The fact that the society directorate believes that more than £2 million can be saved from "efficiencies" suggests that those who work there are aware of slack that can be cut out of the system.
There has been criticism of the society's new £16 million headquarters, built to replace its old HQ in central Horsham.
The society says it was needed for the extra room. It could not have been built in a cheaper part of the country because many staff would have refused to move, leading to high redundancy and recruitment costs.
The council member, who asked not to be named because the society's "protocols of confidentiality" prevent councillors from talking to the press, said staff were already complaining about the new building.
The open plan offices were noisy and some employees were unhappy with the distance from the town centre. This concern may rise with the news that the lunchtime minibus into town is one of the potential cuts.
The council member said: "The society sold its old headquarters in the centre of Horsham for £5.2 million and has spent £16 million on a shed. We didn't need it.
"The amount of staff we have is ridiculous. It's because they like to run it on a military basis with chains of command. You could take three layers out of the bureaucracy and it would still work."
Eyebrows were raised when the society donated £80,000 to a charity chaired by Peter Davies, the director-general, which is building a memorial to animals in war. Money was also donated by WISPA, an international charity supported by the RSPCA.
The decision to give the money was backed by the Charity Commission and, the society says, on the condition that the memorial "promoted kindness towards animals and discouraged ill treatment".
The RSPCA is appealing for a similar amount to save the Llys Nini animal centre which opened near Swansea in 1997. Local members claim the case is indicative of the way the society uses money.
The local branch, which raised more than a million pounds to build the centre, accused the national society of forcing them to build something more extravagant than was necessary.
They say that the £95,000 needed by September to keep the £1.3 million centre open would still be available if a more appropriate and cost-effective centre had been built, using local architects and cutting down on the administrative space that the headquarters demanded.
The RSPCA counters that the centre was built to the society's "national standard" using a "tried and tested approach" but the result was that it lost the support of some of the local fund-raisers now needed to keep the centre open.
It is uncertain whether the money will be raised in time.
Members who criticise the society's activities claim to have been ostracised. Paranoia and an obsession with secrecy afflict both the organisation and its critics. Private detectives have even been used to investigate the society's opponents.
Last year, the society spent £40,000 pursuing an inquiry into the activities of David Mawson, a vegetarian chef and member of the council. The cost of the failed attempt to suspend him from the council is reported to have included £3,560 to track his e-mails.
There was also anger earlier this year when The Telegraph disclosed that the society was planning to spend tens of thousands of pounds on an investigation into which member of its council spoke to the BBC.
The investigation, which some sources suggest cost as much as £80,000, culminated in a 120-page deposition delivered to the Broadcasting Standards Commission last week disputing claims made about Freedom Food in an edition of the Watchdog programme. The BSC has not yet published a ruling. The RSPCA defended the expenditure, which it claimed was much less than reported, because it was "under attack" and had to defend itself.
A spokesman said: "The programme could have done us a lot of damage. If our fund-raising capabilities are threatened we will defend ourselves again and again." The society spent £4.2 million on campaigning last year, including taking out full-page advertisements about hunting in national newspapers.
Owen Perks, who was a council member and treasurer of the society, resigned last year and returned his Queen Victoria Medal in protest at the way he believed the hierarchy had lost touch with supporters.
"I believe the RSPCA should be doing the job it was set up to do and that's preventing cruelty to animals," he said. "It's become a campaigning body." Fears over repercussions mean that many critics within the organisation are willing to speak only anonymously. When they do, what they say reflects a desire from both the pro-hunting and animal rights wings of the society to refocus the charity on animal welfare.
There even appears to be an opportunity to find common ground between the two sides of the hunting debate, though both say that the RSPCA gives no effective forum for it to be found. One critic from the Left of the society said: "There's no open debate whatsoever.
"You've got to have members who agree with the objects but they don't have to agree with the policies. The objects are to promote kindness and prevent cruelty to animals. There are more important issues in animal welfare than hunting."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1402352/RSPCA-millions-go-on-politics-and-HQ.html