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?

You know I would just like to think that all of us care, which I am sure we do. What gets me on this site in general is an assumption that we, as humans have a divine right above other animals to be here.It comes as a shock to a few that yes, there are other mammals, birds, dare we say staffies have just as much right to be here too.

I've never thought I have a divine right above any other creature on this planet.

I do, however, consider it a privilege to be able to end a pet's suffering if need be.

Bella I agree ...You know the sort I mean on this site though. Move out world I'm here.The types you see in the park if your dog steps within 10 feet of them.I do not want to divert the arguement to that old chestnut though.I have my own take on that one all toddlers should be on their leads

They look like the sort of dogs that used to chase after me as a child on my bike and try and bite me.
I'm not a dog person though.
The RSPCA have minimal money though so surely there's a limit to how many dogs they can house indefinitely? I've no desire to pay money to keep unwanted dogs alive.
There are enough people living in grotty conditions who I'd prioritise over unwanted mutts.

2rebecca, the RSPCA have, at the last audit they published, in the region of £119 MILLION in the bank.

Minimal money?!

There has been no suggestion that you pay money to keep unwanted dogs alive, as inhumane as I think your view. The RSPCA is a charity and relies on donations and bequests, not the taxpayer. Independent rescues are often not even registered charities but are dependent on the owners and voluntary donations for the upkeep of the animals on their care, some adding to these by selling dog food/merchandise/on ebay.

valhalla why is that amount in the bank,how on earth do they justify it?

Are they saving it for a rainy day, sadly that day came for those poor dogs.

Animals can act unpredictably around people they haven't met. I have no reason to doubt that these dogs could have been un-handleable when faced with people they didn't know, who were, I assume trying to get them into a van/vehicle of some kind.

I think that was quite likely the case DNFT and I have seen this myself many a time. The RSPCA and Police arrived "mob handed" so to speak, there would have been fear and anger in the staff's voices no doubt, probably tears, possibly raised voices on both parts and the dogs would sense something wasn't right... and some would have reacted badly. My own Lab would do the same yet is a loving family dog with my DC, all but 1 visitor, my other dog and cats.

It begs the question as to why the RSPCA 'experts' didn't take this into account, why they didn't listen to the carers who knew and interacted with the dogs and why they made the decision to kill on site under those circumstances.

I read 'un handleable' as that too.
Unhandleable by those officers that needed to move the dogs at that particular time.
It wouldn't matter what the volunteers were saying.

I am not a dog lover. But my sister is, and her experience of visiting an RSPCA rescue turned her against that organisation for life. She was shocked and horrified at the conditions the poor animals were kept in.

She donates to other animal welfare organisations now, as well as taking on rescue dogs from other sources.

Another thing - Wannabe I take objection to being accused of being on a witch hunt. I work with no-kill rescues and if I have a soapbox issue it is POUNDS, not rescues. Remember, Rosedene is a pound!

Pounds so very often PTS dogs in perfect health because they are there past the legally required 7 days and thus the institution is no longer being paid by the local council for the dog's upkeep. Some pounds are unwilling to cooperate with rescue and people such as myself, who assist in getting dogs into rescue - indeed some are heartless liars who will assure us that they will keep a dog until he can be taken to safety, knowing there is a rescue place waiting within a day or so, and then put the dog to sleep. This comes from cold hard experience, not hearsay.

I work for the DOGS not the owner, the adopter, the pound or any rescue. I offer praise where it is due and work to prevent unnecessary cruelty in whatever way I can. This is why its unusual for me to speak in favour of a pound. Where the RSPCA are in the right, I will support them 101% and where I know they can and will help I will recommend them.

Valhalla - this isn't the first time I've seen you complaining about the RSPCA, in highly emotive terms.
Do you believe people become RSPCA inspectors so that they can kill animals?

No its not the first time Bella. The other time I made a specific post was over the 10 GSDs shot with a captive bolt gun.

By the same token when my local rescue do something I don't agree with I also speak out - in their case I do so to the owners in person, something I can't do with the RSPCA obviously. In a way thats worse for me as the local rescue owners are now friends too and its hard to come on tough with friends.

Of course I don't believe that the RSPCA inspectorate choose to do their jobs so they can kill animals. I do think that some go into the job not knowing how the organisation can act though! I think also that most are working for the right cause but for the wrong organisation and that some are perhaps more of a type to follow policy than to question it (but I know nothing of how the human mind works in deciding these things!). I'd also argue that I know of more RSPCA staff who have left and now won't touch them because of this than I do of people who have experienced independent rescue and who have then decided to "go over" to the RSPCA. My experience is that the view I have of the RSPCA is more common than not amongst those with experience of independent rescue.

Re the killing of Rosedene's 3 unhandleable dogs - is it an unfair comparison to ask you if it would have been acceptable for you to have PTS a normally friendly dog who came into your vets practice for neutering and who was "unhandleable" when you tried to examine/inject him? IME some dogs do become like this at the vets although not normally so and yet the vet doesn't immediately label him as unhandleable and kill him.

I'm tired and busy trying to sort a rescue matter as well as popping on here for light relief so genuine apologies if that IS an unfair comparison. Shall I get my coat?

It's not an unfair comparison, it's a totally ridiculous one. You have absoloutely no way of knowing what went on that day at Rosedene, and how the decision to euthanase those dogs was taken. Many factors may have been taken into account, including the propects for rehoming those dogs. The RSPCA are very clear in their annual report that they will euthanise rather than kennel a dog long-term, as they believe long term kennelling causes distress and welfare isssues in its own right. I agree with them.

Yes, I know about the bolt gun - you've told us several times. I know GSD's are your favourite breed but again you do not know the circumstances and there is every possibility that a decision had to be taken to put those dogs down in that manner on health and safety grounds.

FWIW I have a friend who is an ex Met police inspector and who accompanied the RSPCA on many 'raids'. Not only were there clear procedures to be adhered to if any animals were to be destroyed (this had to be authorised through a clear chain of command), but there were also many instances where the police felt the dogs were too dangerous to deal with, but the RSPCA persevered and argued for the dogs, rather than the safety of the people present.

The RSPCA do not go running in waving guns!

Yes, you certainly can complain in person to the RSPCA. Their website gives an address for complaints - I've used it myself on previous occasions

Most RSPCA workers are working 'for the right cause but the wrong organisation'. Can you hear how that sounds? Especially from someone who works for an independent rescue?

You argue that more rescue workers switch from the RSPCA to independent rescue than vice versa. I've no idea which figures you're basing that on (presumably just your personal experience) but I could well imagine that would be true. Why? Because people like you, Vallhala, wouldn't be happy working for a rescue that euthanises animals rather than kennelling them long term. You also clearly put a great deal of emotion into your work and that can get in the way of being an effective RSPCA inspector, dealing with neglectful or cruel owners. You may be great at caring for dogs but that doesn't mean you could handle the human side of the equation, which is a very large part of an RSPCA inspector's job.

Re the RSPCA's balance sheet - that is how all large charities operate. They are given legacies (money left in wills) and they invest that money and use the interest to fund their day to day activities. I'd like to think if your rescue was given a huge lump sum they'd do the same, as the most prudent way of ensuring they can go no caring for animals year after year.

You also have to remember the huge costs in running the RSPCA - £32m for the inspectorate, £25m on animal establishments, £11m on prosecutions (2008 figures). How on earth do you fund that if you don't have a huge lump sum generating interest? Even so, in 2008 the RSPCA had a net cash outflow of £40m. So, not exactly sitting on a pile of gold and doing nowt!

I see you haven't acknowledged that you may have been wrong re Battersea's kennels

I can fully understand that you would be upset by this happening, Vallhala, but I don't think that spreading misinformation is the way to go about it. I'm not going to get upset with you or accuse you of being on a witch hunt, because (as I've said before) we both want what is best for the dogs. You are at one polar extreme: you believe every dog should be saved and that long term kennelling is acceptable. I do not. So we'll never agree, but I hope we'll always respect each other's point of view.

I also think, on a purely practical level, that you'll get much further with the RSPCA by following a calm, clear course of action than going round spreading libel!

Bella, I avoided saying so before in order not to get involve in a slanging match but if anything was "ridiculous" it was your question, "Do you believe people become RSPCA inspectors so that they can kill animals?".

So let's be reasonable...

I accept your point about BDH - as I said when I made the point I may be out of date as its been a long time since I last went there (longer even than I first realised).

I do NOT work FOR an independent rescue.

And I can NOT of course complain to the RSPCA "in person" - i.e. face-to-face, to Mark Watts the CE, as I neither know him nor do I have access to him.

I could go on and tear the RSPCA's policy on killing animals to pieces, disect their profits and expenditure, but I don't have the time. I will grant you just one thing - you said that I " You may be great at caring for dogs but that doesn't mean you could handle the human side of the equation... "

You're right on both counts and I'm proud of the former and am perfectly at ease with the latter!

Now, I really must get some work done!

That wasn't a ridiculous question re people workng for the RSPCA wanting to kill animals - I was trying to get you to consider the motives of the people involved. Were they trying to do what was best for the dogs (in their opinion, not yours) or did they have sinister motives. I think if you are going to accuse people of needlessly killing animals you need to be relatively clear as to whether they did it with good intentions.

Ok, you may not work for an independent rescue but you are heavily involved with Poplar Farm Kennels - aren't you?

Re Battersea - 'oops sorry, I was wrong' would suffice

Re complaining - that's funny: you can't do it face to face so you have to do it on a public forum?! With unsubstantiated facts? Send them an email if you want....

Email sent already Bella.

I'm not "heavily involved" with Poplar Farm Kennels,

I do however carry out practical hands-on volunteer work for them. They and I are totally independent of each other and whilst they are a genuinely "no-kill" rescue for anything other than incurable suffering (i.e. they practice my own views) they don't endorse every word I say and I don't endorse every word they say. I have equal involvement and interaction, in other ways, with many other rescues but am entirely independent of them all.

As I've said before, I work for the dogs, not any owner, any rescue or any prospective owner.

I don't know anything about this really , but aa a lay person i would have thought you could not up a dog like a rottie up for rehoming if you had the SLIGHTEST doubt about its temporament.If it goes on to maim a child the RSPCA could be up fior manslaughter

Oh good - hope you did the decent thing and included a link to this thread so the RSPCA can see the allegations being made against them

bad spelling !!
and obviously 'maim or kill a child'

ooooh, I missed the personal attack against me! What did it say?

I am pmsl at being called a dog hater. Now that is funny.

Of course most people don't want to think that perfectly healthy dogs are being put to sleep, but let's be honest here, a dog that can never be rehomed is not perfectly healthy is it? There is some reason why the dog can never be rehomed, and to keep it in kennels for the rest of its life is inhumane.

If some rescues recognized that, then perhaps the dogs who are genuinely perfectly healthy would be able to go to those and be found new homes, instead of being put to sleep in place of dogs that will never find a new home and are being kept to prove the "no kill" policies.

Of course what is needed is proper legislation to prevent so many dogs ending up in rescues in the first place. For breeders to be licenced, for newtering to be compulsory if not licenced to breed, just for starters.

Good post, Chegirl.

wannabee plenty of working dogs etc are kept kennelled for life, lots of other people also keep their dogs kennelled or outside, and the dogs live a perfecty happy life. Providing the dog is getting walks and stimulation, whilst it is not a way I chose to keep my dogs, I don't see a problem with it.

That said, there simply aren't enough homes OR Rescue places for all the unwanted dogs in this country and it is impossible to save them all. It does need to be tackled at the source, irresponsible breeders and puppy farmers. Sadly,our government sees puppy farming as a viable and reputable business and thereore it will be unlikely to ever stop. Licences exist for this type of breeder, but sadly do nothing to stop all the unwanted dogs.

you cannot compare a working dog to a rescue dog.

Working dogs generally get a lot of exercise during the course of their work, ie gun dogs, hunting dogs, some police dogs etc. Whereas the level of exercise a rescue dog gets depends largely on the number of volunteers available to give that exercise on any given day.

If a dog is unable to be rehomed then the reasons for this need to be taken into account. If a dog is not suitable as a pet and is not a working dog then realistically you need to question why the dog is being kept in kennels for what could potentially be years. Are those keeping these dogs at any cost really doing it for the benefit of the dog? Or are they doing it because they cannot bear to put it to sleep? In the same way as someone who often keeps a very elderly dog going way past the period at which it should be put to sleep, purely because they cannot bear to part with it, and the actual welfare of the animal is overlooked.