http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/8225119.stm

Surely if you kill a dog, you have been cruel to it? Royal Society for the Prevention of CRUELTY to Animals, no?

Bloody disgrace. What a scumbag. Hope he gets his just deserts.

The RSPCA seem to be sadly lacking in a lot of departments where cruelty is concerned. Just don't seem interested in a lot of cases I have read about, and from a couple of personal ones I have contacted them about.

My brother recently found a young dog (appx 4 months old) running loose in his street. It nearly got run over twice before he managed to catch it.

He brought it indoors and set about knocking on doors with no joy in finding the owners.

His first call was to the local council dog warden, but as it was around 8pm he had no joy there.

He then called the RSPCA and they refused to come out and collect it as it wasn't injured or sick. He had told them that he couldn't keep it overnight as he has two cats which are very dog-unfriendly. He got little or no advice or help and was decidedly unimpressed with them considering they are an animal charity of some wealth and resources.

Eventually he had to clear his shed of any sharp objects and put it in there for the night with a blanket & some food and water. The dog warden collected it the next day.

The thing is if he was a tad less kind he may have just let it go in the street again - probably to be run over. Perhaps then the RSPCA may have responded.

I doubt it.

This doesn't surprise me in the slightest. I'm afraid the more I hear about the RSPCA at the moment, the more disheartened I feel.

To be fair the dogs had been shiting in his garden. Pet owners have to wake up to the fact that once on your property, you call the shots.

Lesson to be leaned. Do not let your pets go onto other peoples property, bad things may happen.

And that warrants a shovel over it's head?

Yes, admittedly the owners should keep their pets under control as they can cause a lot of upset, but FGS, to kill it?

That's a bit strong.

Chuck a bucket of water over the dog. Collect the shit and tip it over the neighbour's doorstep. Hell if the owner is a fella even punch him in the eye.

But belt the dog in the head with a garden hoe? That's way OTT.

Unless it's trained to the dog won't identify it's owner's garden from any other. It's not the animal's fault.

The issue is with the owner, not the dog. The dog shouldn't be killed or hurt in a neighbourly dispute.

No it does not.

If I kick a kitten to death, it would not warrant someone setting my house of fire, but I should not be surprised if that happens.

I'm really not sure what you trying to say here. I suspect I know what you're about, but your point isn't clear or all that relevant.

Oh don't get me started. I work with animals (not RSPCA or SSPCA tho) and the amount of people we've had calling saying they're not responding to calls is incredible. If you so much as feed a stray cat once, the branch where I live tell you "It's your problem. You've fed it so you've legally taken on the responsibility for it"

I've been reporting my neighbour for over a YEAR for leaving the dog padlocked in the hut, muzzled too tightly with no bed, food, water or floorspace to urinate or even turn around. You have to look at the pic to understand (PIC HERE, and yes that is a dog's arse) and it's taken until THIS AFTERNOON for them to even bother sending someone round to their house (noone was in) They didn't even come and see me even though I didn't care about remaining anonymous.

I think the thing that pisses me off is that the SSPCA is LITERALLY at the bottom of the lane at my house... Not even a 5 minute walk, and they've not bothered. When I called earlier in the year (after already voicing my concerns several times before) they said there was NO RECORD of my previous calls and I was told "If they've not done it for 24 hours straight then it's not a priority". So it's ok for them to do it for 12 hours a day, every day for a year?

The mind. It boggles...

Sory for the rant
Last edited by kiviraat : 28-08-2009 at 00:04

Good on you for trying to improve the life of that poor dog. If only a great new owner could be found and that dog could be dognapped when it's owners are out one day and whisked off to a caring new home!

My great aunt did that once, she kept seeing this dog just chained up in a garden all day with no shelter, so one day she just took it home with her. The owner never found out it was her and the dog lived happily ever after

"...the dog did not suffer undue pain." ... WHAAAAAAT?! are they serious?! are they implying that being whacked on the head with a hoe with enough force to fracture the skull wouldnt be sore?! ffs, i'll send my 4 year old to educate them, she's infinately more empathetic and knowledgable!

I'm sorry but when I read about violence against animals I become angry and sometimes I find it difficult to out down my feelings.

I'm not ashamed to admit I've done that once with a mistreated kitten. I could not bare to witness its neglect/maltreatment any longer and it now resides in domestic bliss with a whole new identity!
I probably would do it again too if an animal situation was as bad. Sadly, the R.S.P.C.A. were not effective in the situations I've witnessed in the past and as animals do not have a voice we have to make a choice and act or let the suffering continue. I should add I would not encourage anyone to break the law and to try the R.S.P.C.A. route first.

I did the same when I worked in animal welfare. With the help of the owner's relative, who was very concerned about the welfare of a kitten, we went into a flat and got the kitten into a home where he was properly looked after. I am not surprised about the RSPCA's attitude - I've seen some appalling stories about them, I 'll try to find the links and post them up.

I can only post from experience -

My dad was driving from work when 2 greyhounds were run over a couple of cars in front.

My dad stopped, his friend called the RSPCA.

The RSPCA point blank refused to help, said that the dogs were my dads responsibility.

My dad put both dogs in his car and took them to a vets - both were fine and the owner came forward as they had escaped from the garden.

This story made the front page of either 'our dogs' or 'dog world' (this was back in the day) but only as my dad is a well respected international judge.

It makes you wonder how many unreported cases the RSPCA refuse to go out to.

The RSPCA have got so big they've forgotten what they're about, what they're actually supposed to do. They change from being a charity to a business, and 'corporate image' comes first and funds are spent in areas that the supporters would cringe at.

Unfortunately, Cats Protection are going the same way, and the ones that suffer in the end are the animals that these organisations were set up to protect.

Always best to support the smaller, local charities as then you know the donations are going exactly where they're needed - to save animals.

I have heard some real horror stories about the cats protection league. I would advise any cat lover to have nothing more to do with them.

On the other hand my experience is that the RSPCA can not do enough to help. I have been very impressed by their professionalism and care.

Completely the opposite in my case.

However, my friend is secretary of my local Cats Protection (how we met) and the stories she tells me of how they (Head Office) are interferring with (and dictating to) the local branches are worrying. These people are volunteers in the main, all they want is to help cats, and CP are driving them away.

To advise people to have nothing to do with Cats Protection, as you seem to do with vets too, is wrong imho, the RSPCA are far more likely to either not bother at all or put an animal down for no reason than are CP.

To add to my previous post, I am beginning to wonder about your posts. You seem to have some sort of hidden agenda, and I can't work out what it is, but I will.

The story has been updated:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/8227517.stm


and


The problem here is that the article linked to by the OP was written when the prosecution had put its case, but the defence had yet to reply. The prosecution claim was that he had hit the dog with a hoe just for being in, and fouling, his garden. If that had been the case, I'd have been all in favour of coming down on him like the proverbial ton of bricks.

The defence claim was that the neighbour's dogs were attacking his own dog and his chickens at the time, and he was trying to stop that attack. That situation is rather different from the one presented in the first article.

I found this post most hurtful. If you wished to question my integrity you could have done it via PM.

I expect you are a very rude person, and I ask that you no longer reply to any of my posts.