RSPCA change their rules

[willman]

Its sounds like it as had to make a decision on how to prioritise where it spends money, it doesn’t have a bottomless pit of money to spend.

 

True and remarkably you would not believe the number of rescue volunteers who refuse to give to the RSPCA as a charity or the number of private individuals who refuse to donate to the "corporate" charity because of the executives alleged multi million pound salaries.

[MrMoran]

Its sounds like it as had to make a decision on how to prioritise where it spends money, it doesn’t have a bottomless pit of money to spend.

 

No but 114 million a year aint half bad.

[Murphy Jnr]

I don't think it's much of a concern as the majority of dogs and cats are rescued by smaller charities anyway. A lot of family pets in need of help through hospitalisation etc of owners are the concern of social services and either reside temporarily in council care or with rescues that cater for this.

The RSPCA have been stuck in no mans land for a while now so they should concentrate on a specific cause or area if only to regain some of the respect they have lost.

 

There are too many dogs and cats in this country and I personally; as i've said before, believe that rescues are doing more harm than good in trying to find places for everything. I also think that councils should take a great deal more responsibility for what is a social problem and not rely on others to do the work for them with little to no support.

[AJ sheffield]

Too many cats n dogs anyway!

A cull,license or tagging may bring down the numbers.

 

Or a combination of all three.

[kittenta]

Something needs to be done. I don't want to seem heartless,but 20 million cats n dogs in the UK,to a population of 60+million?

 

It's not as simple and you say though. Until people change, the situation won't change. There are so many unowned pets out there because of people. People who don't spay or neuter their pets. Cats have kittens, the owners can't afford to keep them all so they either dump them or find them new homes. People them take on pets thinking what a cute kitty / puppy then pass them on when they become too much hard work or cost too much money or grow too big.

 

Life changes and sometimes a 'pet for life' isn't possible. I had to give away two of my cats due to splitting up with the ex and he wouldn't take any of them. Being on my own as a single parent I simply couldn't afford to look after them all. I found a home for them and one is still there (sadly the other went missing) and the new owner was made fully aware that if their situation changed, I would take them back. I may have had to give them up but they won't be dumped or sent to rescue. Many pet owners don't think that way.

 

I often think that spaying / neutering should be free. Surely the cost of it would be far less than the cost of looking after the off springs when they get dumped?

[willman]

If pet owners have a concern of what happens with their pet if anything happens they can easily pre empt it. But like leaving wills no one thinks it will happen to them. It isn't the charities responsibility to pick up the pieces.

 

I've already told my parents their three dogs will be cared for - i'll take them to my sisters.

[MrMoran]

If pet owners have a concern of what happens with their pet if anything happens they can easily pre empt it. But like leaving wills no one thinks it will happen to them. It isn't the charities responsibility to pick up the pieces.

 

I've already told my parents their three dogs will be cared for - i'll take them to my sisters.

 

Outstanding advert there matey:thumbsup:

[willman]

Outstanding advert there matey:thumbsup:

 

It wasn't intentional,honest guvnor.

[MrMoran]

It wasn't intentional,honest guvnor.

 

:hihi:

[RootsBooster]

Playing devils advocate on this issue - smacking/hitting a dog isn't abuse. Regardless of everyones "oh yes it is" "how would you feel " remarks to follow.

I'm not saying it's right but it isn't abuse unless it's a downright beating of the animal, i know loads of dog owners who tap the dog with a stick or walk with a stick to control the dog or yank on its collar,shepherds still use a crook on working dogs.

Hence why they probably had reservations to respond by the Inspectors.

 

I know people like this, it's because they've never trained the dog properly. Once a dog has been trained correctly you shouldn't need to tap it with a stick, and DEFINITELY not yank it's collar. If your dog is so unpredictable that you need a stick to control it, it needs to be on a lead. If it's on a lead then you don't need a stick.

 

I hate it when I see chavs out with a dog they haven't trained, shouting at them for "not listening, stoopid dog!" yanking on the lead aggressively while the dog just looks confused or a little scared.

 

It never ceases to amaze me how many people get a dog and think it can understand English. Even more amazing that some will talk louder and slower as if this makes the dog understand words that it hasn't been trained to respond to.

 

I had this with my sister in law, she got a dog and was complaining that "it's a stupid ignorant dog". She'd stand there shouting at the dog to "SIT" while it looked blanky at her. She'd never trained the dog to recognise and respond to the word, but she expected that it should know what she's shouting at it for !