The RSPCA make a statement

The legal team from a large well know animal charity threaten us with trademark infringement if we use their name.
They aRe deSPiCAble!!!!!!!

Press Release from SHG: RSPCA ATTEMPTS TO CENSOR THE INTERNET AND SUPPRESS CRITICISM. NB we are not responsible for the content on external websites.

OCT 1st 2009 STOP PRESS: The legal team from the UK's largest and richest animal welfare charity, have today contacted this rescue threatening to sue for Trademark Infringement for using the acronym that is their name. If you have made a will that contains this acronym, please contact your solicitor immediately to make sure you don't infringe their trademark. We have checked and it is OK to replace offending acronym with 'CINNAMON TRUST'. Robert Killick writing for Our Dogs Says

REMEMBER NOW: 'The objects of the Society shall be to promote kindness and to prevent or suppress cruelty to animals and to do all such lawful acts as the Society may consider to be conducive or incidental to the attainment of those objects. '

Expert Witness comments on the RSPCA statement

This was sent by the RSPCA to one of our volunteers

Statement regarding 10 German Shepherd dogs in South Wales 16.7.09

We received a call on 23 June this year from a member of the public relating to 10 German Shepherd dogs at an address in Pontardawe, in south Wales. The caller said the dogs’ owner, a relative, had died and the dogs had been living on their own.

An RSPCA inspector visited the premises that day and assessed the animals. The inspector took the decision that none of the dogs were at all suitable for rehoming due to concerns about their aggressive behaviour and lack of socialisation with people. The dogs were also suffering from a severe skin condition.

We explained the next-of-kin that they should contact other rescue groups for help. The next-of-kin were made fully aware that if the RSPCA became involved, the dogs would be euthanased.

So the dogs were not deemed to be fit for rehoming yet the inspector told the relatives to offer them to other rescues!! Remember now, that the RSPCA do not consider their officers to be expert witnesses when they go to court. Where were the expert witnesses to offer an opinion on these poor dogs?

The owner’s next-of-kin later contacted the RSPCA again and said they had been turned down by other charities, including the Dogs Trust, who were unwilling to take on the animals and they signed over the dogs, fully aware of what would happen.

01 September 2009 14:57
Thank you for your email.
We have spoken to our Rehoming Centre based in Bridgend and our Head Office in London and can find no evidence that either were contacted regarding the rehoming of the ten German Shepherd dogs. Although we cannot comment without knowing all the facts, we agree that the breed rescues would have offered some hope for these dogs.
 
Thank you for supporting Dogs Trust and for bringing this to our attention.

So the dogs were suffering so much that the inspector left them in the house for a few days, went away to leave the relatives to find a home for dogs that were deemed by a non expert witness to be unfit for rehoming. A skin condition would not deteriorate in a few days!!

A decision was made following a discussion between eight RSPCA officers that the most humane form of euthanasia would be to use a captive bolt. This would minimise distress to the dogs, while also being the safest method for those people responsible for dealing with the animals. Restraining the dogs and then shaving a limb to prepare for a lethal injection would have caused these animals unnecessary suffering, due to the animals suffering from a severe skin condition.

The inspector euthanased the dogs using a captive bolt. After a discussion between eight officers, this was decided to be the most humane method. It was also the most suitable as the dogs were too dangerous to approach for a vet to administer a sedative, to allow for a lethal injection.

Doesn't euthanasia mean painless death? A captive bolt is a stunning device used in slaughter houses. Doesn't the heart continue to beat? We believe it to be an extremely unpleasant death.

The dogs were taken outside into the garden of the house on a grasper, given a few moments of exercise (it is unlikely they had been outside in weeks, if not months) and then the inspector used a captive bolt.

But you said that the dogs were too dangerous to approach. Surely you can't walk a strange, dangerous dog around and keep it calm on the end of a grasper. If the dogs were so aggressive and dangerous, how would you get close enough in order to keep the dogs still long enough to be accurate with a bolt gun? IT DOESN'T ADD UP!!!!!!!

The house was in a remote and isolated situation, away from any other properties. Each dog was euthanased away from the rest of the dogs which were kept in the house. They would have been unable to hear the captive bolt being used as it is a very quiet method.

The dogs were only handled for a very short amount of time, on the grasper, and stress was kept to an absolute minimum. Nobody was injured and the dogs appeared to be oblivious to the fact that this was anything other than being taken into the garden.

It is the RSPCA’s raison d’être to prevent cruelty to animals, and it was decided this sad, but ultimately necessary, outcome for the dogs was the best way to prevent the animals any further suffering. The decision was not made lightly and, as always, it was made with the best interests of the animal at heart.

We acknowledge that RSPCA is a registered trademark registered to the Royal Society for The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. We are not using this trademark in the course of trade but simply to make a statement.

Donations are all ways welcome

Please help us by making a donation so that we can help re home more unwanted German Shepherd Dogs. Donations can be sent to Jayne Shenstone, German Shepherd Dog Rescue, Little Vauld, Marden Hereford HR1 3HA. We also accept Paypal payments - just click on the Paypal button below. Thankyou.