“Okay, firstly I think we all need to ignore Paul from West Cross comments, and get back to the point. The RSPCA is very quickly losing the respect of the public and this is only doing harm to more animals. When people are in the difficult positon of having to give up an animal ( something I know is prevalant in this difficult times) they are assuming that this animal will be found a loving new home and not destroyed! The RSPCA seriously need to change their policies! Regarding the recent story of the poor child in Liverpool, this is becoming more and more common and it is not the animals at fault here but the owners ( now possibly being investiagted for breeding fighting dogs!). All of these mauling stories are in areas with social economic problems ... why is this? Maybe because these animals are not treated in the way they should be treated... with a healthy respect.”

“Yes Paul, based on Facts.”

“Keith, Cardiff.
You have made a very serious accusation and therefore I have no more comments on the matter.
Take care.”

“Paul, West Cross.
Whilst I agree with what you say in your last post, you also said ina earlier post quote "The RSPCA does not claim that dog rescue centres were approached"
They clearly DO claim that they approached Dog Trust and it turned out to be a blatant lie. Then when Dog Trust were approached the RSPCA deleted that part of their statement. Unfortunatley for them it is on record.
However, as I said early in this post, the onus is upon the owners or those in charge to find them secure homes. This said, none of the recues, including GSD rescues , have come forward to confirm this.
So WHY did the RSPCA lie about it ? a lot of what they have been stating about this case has been proved as lies and then in EVERY case when it has ben proved that they were lies they have deleted their statement. Is that the way we expect supposidly respectable organisations to work?”

“Keith, Cardiff.
I fail to see how the RSPCA statement proves you right.
The onus to find homes or rescue centres for the dogs was with the next-of-kin.”

“For Paul, West Cros.
I knew I was right about the RSPCA and Dog Trust who catagorically deny ever being contacted by the RSPCA or anyone else.
This is the RSPCA statement put out. They then CHANGED it to suit.....................................
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.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

“There are currently around 8 million dogs in the UK so it is obvious that there will be a certain percentage of dogs that bite and in a small number of cases seriously injure a child.
Most of these cases are caused in families where little to no control is placed on the dog and little real common sense is implemented to prevent any bad situation.
It is in a very small number of cases if any where the dog is totally to blame it is stupid people.
No rspca Inspector can determine the behavioural pattern of any dog given the circumstances and little time scale like with the 10 GSDs that were killed by a bolt gun. I have a GSD from an horrendous background that snarled and tried to bite every man that came in close proximety to her at the Dog Rescue. Two weeks on she sits by my side whilst I post this reply she still growls when visitors come and will still bear her teeth at men but in time she will settle down and not be terrified in case of a beating.
The rspca acted too quickly and in ignorance in regard to the GSD and a proper experienced assesment should have been made, in any case the rspca is an animal charity not the grimm reaper.
If any steps are taken to kill a dog it should be justified and perhaps better legislation regarding some no kill policy dog homes where very aggresive long term residents that cannot be safely rehomed should be perhaps euthanased and not eventually placed into a domestic household.”

“Today's headline,'Family Dogs Maul Girl 4'

Wake up and smell the coffee.”

“Well summed up Andrew (Northants). This is wholly in line with my experience and feelings. The RSPCA is only interested in cases with sufficient publicity to court the "soft touch" (not a criticism) animal lovers for a surge in funds they know will follow.
It's time they were forced back to fulfilling their role of protecting all animals , not just those that are able to swell their coffers.”

“The truth is that the rspca were once very good and worked within their area of knowledge ( domestic cats and dogs and in the very beginning donkeys ).
Sadly and unfortunately, in my opinion, they have become just another money orientated business with a dangerous political agenda.
They pushed for a new animal welfare act ( I was an invited consultee ) that was introduced in 2006 and has blatantly failed seeing a documented increase in cruelty and abandonment and animal welfare ignored in favour of the obsession with prosecutions as opposed to advice.
The Government has handed ALL responsibility and financial costs over into the eager hands of the RSPCA and they have become unanswerable to anyone. The Government gets a pet police force paid for by the public and a total clear sheet of any accountability or responsibility. ( I wonder just how many millions are saved by the Government as more and more charities pick up the bill and responsibility in ALL areas of life, especially health care ).
The RSPCA failed ( unlike their counterparts in Australia ) to address the serious issues relating to the thousands of animals that die and suffer increasingly each year due to both uncontrolled public useage of fireworks and airguns. Every horrendous case the RSPCA deal with, such as the ponies case earlier this year the RSPCA appear to have a surge in donations ( which in one context can be seen as cruelty generating revenue ). There are hundreds, if not thousands of independent animal rescues across the UK that do in many instances are far better job than the RSPCA and many are used by the RSPCA to take in animals. I have over 40 years experience in wildlife rehabilitation and year in year out become increasingly dissolutioned by the ignorance and callous actions of RSPCA employees when attempting to deal with wildlife casualties. The sad case of the 10 GSD is mirrored ALL TOO regularly by the RSPCA and wildlife in all too many cases is destroyed by a seemingly ignorant lack of care and resources and a refusal for the RSPCA to work with or even learn from those far more experienced. Animal Welfare in the UK is a sad joke compounded by a brainwashed public and weak media that both fail to see or address the facts that perhaps animal welfare and its` legislation should be a Government controlled area and not dominated by a pet animal charity.”