To think that these are NOT dangerous dogs - see pictures please.

[Vallhala]

Please see the pictures on my profile.

The RSPCA recently raided Rosedene, a West Midlands dog pound, claiming animal welfare act infringements. They killed 3 dogs on site, claiming they were unhandleable, and took the other 56. They will not say where those 56 are now or whether all are still alive. Many of us have asked polite but direct questions on the RSPCAs Facebook page. Not only have all of those questions have been deleted, we have all also been barred from posting any more on the RSPCAs F/B pages.

Rosedene was the council pound and inspected by the local council, which had no issue with it. Conditions were far from perfect BUT all the dogs were well cared for and the staff and volunteers worked hard to place dogs in rescues and not to put them to sleep, including the rescue I work most closely with - and we have no complaints about the condition of dogs received from Rosedene. Staff and volunteers at Rosedene are devastated.

In my experience as a rescue worker it is a remarkable pound that allows volunteers in to help dogs - many would have too much to hide to permit it.

These photos are of 2 of the 3 dogs killed by the RSPCA during their raid, taken just a few days before it happened.

DO THESE LOOK LIKE UNHANDLEABLE DOGS TO YOU?

I can't see the pics, not that anyone could tell on sight alone but it does sound outrageous given the history of succesfull rehoming you describe

What can be done to help?

can;t see your profile - but even if i could a picture wouldn't tell me anything.

Oh rollocks, I set my MN profile to public... what have I done wrong?! Will go look.

Think the pictures are visible now. Sorry!

What can be done?

Spread the word, tell your friends and family, people you meet on dog walks if you own a dog yourself. Join the Facebook group on Rosedene (details with the pictures), join the RSPCAs and ask them whether they can justify their actions... see how long it takes them to delete the question and bar you!

And for gods sake, those of you who do, don't donate to the RSPCA. A few months ago they shot 10 German Shepherd Dogs with a captive bolt gun (which often stuns but doesn't kill and is barbaric), against all international welfare guidelines, and without trying to find rescues which WOULD and COULD have taken and cared for them.

Ask the RSPCA this.... of these dogs were unhandleable how the fuck did they get close enough to them to administer a lethal injection?

Tbh they don't look like dogs that I would want to upset. But you cannot tell anything from a photo.

i dont know from the pictures.

i am sure that the rspca has a complaints procedure and policy in place that you can follow.

apart from this i find it difficult to comprehend that an animal welfare charity acts in haste. i hope you find the justice you are looking for, i would start with RSPCA complaints

But who would you believe, WTSAP? The people who had worked with, fed, cared for, walked and (clearly) got face to face with those dogs and cuddled them or someone who went in there and decided that they were unhandleable within the space of a couple of hours, maybe even minutes?

pictures tell nothing. It's the equivelant of posting a picture of a person and saying does this man look like a child killer to you.

Problem with the RSPCA is that they are not accountable to the public in the way in which most similar organisations are, despite being the national face of animal welfare. They are not bound by the Data Protection Act to answer to the public and in my experience and that of others in rescue, have refused to answer pertinent questions, as they did re the 10 GSDs shot with a captive bolt gun.

Put it on a par with Social Services, who are equally responsible for lives and welfare... what if THEY weren't answerable?

Which welfare acts did the dog pound supposedly infringe?

Agreed pictures tell only part of the story. The other part of Rosedenes is told by the staff and volunteers themselves and by those like my local no kill rescue which have taken dogs from that pound (and been there themselves). What reason would VOLUNTEERS have to lie if Rosedene was unacceptable? We volunteers would be the first to speak up if we knew a pound or rescue was breaking animal welfare laws, believe me please.

This is not JUST about the dead dogs, its about where the others are tonigh and what will happen to them. The RSPCA kill over 60,000 animals a year - which includes more than one out of every 3 dogs. Some of these dogs are killed in circumstances such as this, most in RSPCA "rescue kennels".

Reasons for this are not just temperement and ill health. I have had an RSPCA officer asking me to help get a dog out of an RSPCA rescue kennel on the quiet as he was due to be put to sleep... as he was TOO UGLY to be rehomed.

A fellow volunteer of mine has taken 4 dogs out of RSPCAs kennels recently as they were all due to be PTS although healthy and friendly. Three have since been rehomed through independent rescue, the other is still waiting for a home in a no kill rescue.

Still waiting to hear exactly what the alleged infringement was UD.

the rspca is a charity and therefore at the very least answerable to the charities commission.

if they do not have a complants policy- they will btw i'd wager. i would go to the charity commission.

www.charitycommission.gov.uk/publications/cc47.asp

"The Charity Commission is the independent regulator of charities in England and Wales. Our job as regulator is to work closely with charities to ensure that they are accountable, well run and meet their legal obligations in order to promote public trust and confidence."

list of RSPCAs here

rspca walsall pleaes contact them and ask for a copy of their complaints policy

Thats being tried by German Shepherd Dog Rescue UK re the shot GSDs Custardo. No joy as yet AFAIK.

As a result of GSDR UKs public outcry on the shot dogs, the RSPCA's lawyers wrote to the owner regarding her use of the acrynom RSPCA, which they said they had not given her permission to use.

Oddly they haven't written to similar organisations which praise the RSPCA.

Oh, and if the RSPCAs CE, Mark Watts, is reading this... so sue me!

And by god, yes we WILL be complaining!

I had been going to post:

Sorry, successful transition to rehoming centres. (?)

Was farcebook your only method of communication? Who are the RSPCA accountable to, out of interest?

...but you've covered all of that since! I did read about the GSD's but hadn't read about the use of a bolt gun having seen one in action it is quite astounding to think that one was used by the RSPCA on dogs!

Our local RSPCA has negated the issue of 'ugly' dogs by not allowing prospective new owners to see any dogs.

You have to make a blind application and they choose the dog for you. They can then also be secure in the knowledge that no members of the public will be able to see the sorry state of their kennels of course!

Sorry, a tangent but grrr.

To be fair the local rescue I work most closely with (and see regularly as a hands on volunteer) works on a similar basis EM.

You fill in a rehoming questionnaire (tbh to weed out the "I want a Rottie as a guard dog, to be kept outside and trained to bite ppeople" numpties, we do get them!), and the rescue invites you to meet a selection of dogs which they think suitable, then homechecks you. They aren't open to the public.

BUT thay are different to the RSPCA. This rescue is run solely by the 2 owners and a team of volunteers. The owners work a minimum 18 hour day, 24/7 and don't have time to stop for people to just drop in. They have to work to a routine, feeding, exercising, medicating dead on time their epileptic dogs, or else those dogs will fit if their meds aren't on time, and fit in emergncies, vet trips etc. they don't have £119 million in the bank like the RSPCA to change that practice or insure the public.

Of course, like the RSPCA, they are also aware that there is no point in a family with DC/cats falling in love with a dog they meet on a wander round only to find he is not child/cat friendly.

God knows who the RSPCA are accountable to apart from the Charities Commission - no-one I believe. Not sure if I get quite what you mean about FB being the only means of communication, EM, whose only means?

(Sorry, it is stupid o'clock and I'm not all with-it!).

Sorry for the appalling grammar, spelling and typos! Zzzzzz!

Vallhala, I should say that I'm not committed to doggy welfare, as you clearly are, though I don't like to see any living creature made to suffer. And I'm not a massive fan of the RSPCA because of scandals like the bolt guns, which you've outlined. But I think you could have linked to the BBC's extensive library of Rosedene pictures, to give your respondents more information. Like I said, I don't know much about dog welfare. But, to my ignorant eyes, the accommodations don't look that brilliant.

Here's the link for complaints to the RSPCA about their rehoming policy. The RSPCA does have a reputation for arrogance when dealing with complaints. They're all we've got, though!

The patron of the RSPCA is HM the Queen. Here's the info for writing to her.

Good luck!

I am confused. On what authority did the RSPCA raid Rosedene? Presumably they must have had a court order to do that and must have produced some evidence to get the court order?

Re "unhandlable dogs", and who can determine that best, it's a difficult one. If I cared for a dog as a shelter volunteer I would find it very hard to admit it was unhandleable as I would know what the consequence was so I'm not sure that the shelter staff necessarily would admit it. Do you know for a FACT (ie witnessed with your own eyes) that these dogs were being handled by volunteers.

ps I am no fan of the RSPCA but I'm just putting a bit of a different light on it.

There is clearly a huge amount of animosity between independent rescues and the RSPCA - a quick google brings up many references to dogs being 'murdered' by the RSPCA and various conspiracy theories about why RSPCA inspectors carry class A or B drugs (em, Ketamine, a horse tranquiliser, perhaps?!).

tbh the hysterical language on those sites does no credit to the RSPCA's critics.

I suspect it comes down very much to whether you believe passionately in saving every single dog's life, no matter what. I, for one, believe that if there is no reasonable chance of finding a dog a home and the choice is between putting it to sleep (or murder, if you prefer), then it's better to put it to sleep.

The RSPCA, for all their faults (and I have complained to them personally on occasion) do a lot of good work, and rehome many animals. There are simply too many unwanted dogs in this country - the surplus must either be accommodated (and the cost met by someone!) or an objective view taken as to whether it's likely to spend the rest of its life in appalling conditions.

It's about quality of life, not just life. We must do what's best for the animal's welfare, not just for our own satisfaction at having 'rescued' another dog to eek out its days in a wire cage.

We've argued before on this Valhalla and you know I am an animal lover and an ex rescue worker and vet nurse. I admire your passion but I do not agree with you.

Missed out some words -

'if the choice is between putting it to sleep and kennelling it for life'

My own dog trying to crawl on my lap

Yes. Good riddance.

To the dogs, rollmops? Not being argumentative - just not sure who you meant good riddance to

I also don't think it is possible to save every single life, but I do think the RSPCA are scum, tbh. Whatever good they may do does not excuse the fact that they are considerably less helpful when there are no TV cameras about, or that they have been caught out keeping animals in far less than suitable conditions themselves, or killing animals inhumanely.

Valhalla, the RSPCA have illegally taken many animals and successfully been taken to court for doing so. There are severeal solicitors who deal specifically with cases relating to the RSPCA's illegal activities.

There was a case a couple of years ago where a woman's aged horses were illegally taken by the RSPCA. She had owned them almost all of their lives and both were over 30. She had decided to let them live out one last summer and they were under the regular care of her own vet, who agreed with her decision. Yet the RSPCA decided they were neglected and took them anyway, to totally unsuitable living conditions, where they then proceeded to lose weight (which they could ill afford) and became ill. The RSPCA refused otlet the owners vet liase with their own vet, fed them unsuitable food, kept them stabled which they were nto used to and when they did get out they only had access to filthy water and a 'paddock' strewn with wire and debirs that could have easiyl caused injury. Eventually, someone put the owner in contact with a solicitor and when threatened with court action the RSPCA agreed to return the horses to the owner. They had had no legal right to take them in the first place. Sadly, and due to the stress and unsuitable conditions the RSPCA put these animals under, the owner and her vet decided that it was unfair to put these poor horses through anything else upon their return home and they were put to sleep shortly afterwards.

I know of numerous cases involving reptiles where the RSPCA have acted ridiculously and appalingly.