Are there any KILL shelters in the UK?
Alison
Dawn Baily <Dawn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3b54fc93...@news.lineone.net...
> Our resident Canadian troll, Gerry, claims that millions of health
> cats are being killed each year in the UK because of a lack of homes.
>
> I believe he is telling lies. That very few health cats are put to
> sleep by shelters in the UK.
>
> Does anyone know a shelter that kills cats just because they can't
> find homes for them?
Hi Dawn,. The RSPCA puts healthy unwanted cats to sleep > I don't know
the exact figures but it is not millions.
Alison
>
>
> --
> Dawn Baily.
Gerry
"Dawn Baily" <Dawn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3b54fc93...@news.lineone.net...
> Our resident Canadian troll, Gerry, claims that millions of health
> cats are being killed each year in the UK because of a lack of homes.
>
> I believe he is telling lies.
First, I never lied. I only simply provided quotes and included web-links
to various UK Animal welfare organisations that contradict Dawn's position
that "there is no stray problem in the UK, all cats are found homes very
quickly, no healthy cats are ever put down in the UK, the pet-overpopulation
problem has been solved, and because of this indescriminant breeding of your
cat is ok and you can now let your unnuetered Tomcats roam the outdoors."
However, I still stand by my own belief that anyone who takes this stance is
not working in best interests of UK animal welfare. If too many people
thought like this, the problem would be *much* worse than it is today.
There are more than enough accidental moggie births to actually breed these
cats purposefully, not to mention the relinquished adult cats spending time
in cages while they await adoption or perhaps in some cases a worse fate.
> That very few health cats are put to
> sleep by shelters in the UK.
Progress!! It used to be you parroted Bob Brenchley's stance that "Healthy
cats are *never* put down in the UK". Now ask yourself this, how "few" is
still two many? 500,000 cats? 5,000 cats? 5 cats? What number prompted
you to believe that anyone who wants the right to indiscriminantly breed
their moggie should, and letting their unnuetered Toms roam is ok? What
number of cat's lives lost makes you "care"? I know we can make even more
progress here :-)
> Does anyone know a shelter that kills cats just because they can't
> find homes for them?
For the record. It was because I posted THIS (below "*****") that I've been
branded a <other insults omitted> liar and troll by this individual:
However Dawn, I suggest you take up your opposition to this public
information provided by your shelters, animal welfare organisations, and
Government with them. They are not my statements. I'm sorry if all these
sites anger you. But you'll have to learn to deal with it. There are
hundreds of other UK sites that would also anger you, I just grabbed the
first few. It seems they *all* anger you for some reason.
**********
Why neuter your pets in the UK?
http://www.behaviour-problems.freeserve.co.uk/2/Health/Spaying%20and%20Neute
ring.htm
"You are helping to alleviate the dog and cat overpopulation problem.
Each year, millions of unwanted dogs and cats are euthanized (killed) at
shelters across the country. Although pet behavioural problems are the main
reasons animals are given to shelters, many orphans are the result of
accidental breeding by free-roaming, unaltered pets. The more pets spayed or
neutered, the fewer dogs and cats will have to be destroyed"
From pethealcare.co.uk:
http://www.pethealthcare.co.uk/cats/asktheexperts/qadetail.asp?section=cats&
questionid=14
"To do this, they need to fight other males, mark their territories with
very strong-smelling urine, and roam for long distances in search of a mate.
Male kittens can be neutered at about 5 months of age to prevent all this.
Females can get pregnant from around 5 months of age onwards. Entire queens
come into season every two weeks or will produce a litter every 9 weeks. To
prevent your home being surrounded by every entire tom in the neighbourhood
or having litters of kittens to find homes for, it is best to have your cat
spayed. Every year, thousands of unwanted cats are euthanased due to
insufficient homes. Please help prevent this by having your cat neutered
before they can add to the problem."
"Britain has around 1 million feral cats"
http://www.messybeast.com/ukferal.htm
"Q. Should I let my cat have a litter of kittens before I get her neutered?
Stanhope Park Veterinary Practice, Darlington says :
It is a very sad fact of life that some animals have to be destroyed because
there are not enough homes available to take them. It is often the case that
many people who are looking for a pet will only take a puppy or a kitten,
which makes it very difficult to find older dogs and cats a home."
http://www.thisisthenortheast.co.uk/the_north_east/petscorner/advice/cats/ha
vekittens.html
From UK's Valley-vets saying why males must be neutered:
"What are the benefits of neutering?
Population control
Thousands of cats are destroyed each year because there are far more cats
born than homes available. A single male cat can father many litters so that
neutering of intact males is essential for population control. Although
sexual desire will be greatly reduced by castration, some experienced males
may continue to show sexual interest in females."
http://www.valleyvets.co.uk/educat/cat/Feline%20neutering.html
Why neuter your cat, and not breed:
"Firstly, the bleak figures and facts well-known to rescuers.
More than 1000 healthy, friendly cats and kittens are destroyed daily in
Britain simply because they exceed the number of available homes. A visit
to a vet engaged in destroying a succession of such cats and kittens is a
sobering experience. In some areas, an estimated 80% of healthy kittens are
destroyed."
http://www.sarcenet.com/neuter.htm
Birmingham's WELLCAT:
"Many cats are needlessly destroyed each year simply because there is no one
to care for them.
Too often people buy or adopt adorable fluffy kittens with little thought
for the animals future."
http://www.wellcat.org.uk/
Celia Hommond Animal Trust in East Sussex:
"Every day thousands of healthy dogs, cats, puppies and kittens are
destroyed. Animals are being killed because there is a tragic imbalance
between the number of animals born and the homes available. Two and a half
million strays are condemned to struggle for survival in the streets - often
victims of hunger, cruelty and disease. Sadly, these animals are not wanted
anywhere by anyone.
The problem is not going to get better or go away. The major animal welfare
societies spend vast amounts of money on kennelling and holding facilities f
or unwanted animals - many of which are ultimately destroyed. Largely the
only solution has been to kill 'surplus' animals as a means of birth
control. This is totally unacceptable to us and we never do it.
These animals, brought into the world only to die, should never have been
born in the first place. If sufficient animals were neutered, this daily
slaughter would not be necessary. The establishment of low-cost spaying
clinics will provide a humane alternative."
http://www.celiahammond.org/
Some BAD news:
"The Bad News
Everyday in this country of "animal lovers" an estimated 2000-4000 dogs and
cats, puppies and kittens are destroyed as there are no homes available for
them"
http://www.uk-expo.com/lastchance/badnews.htm
From the Newham government site:
http://www.newham.gov.uk/newhammag/issue4/petcare.htm
"Up to 4000 pets have to be destroyed in the UK each day. Not that
surprising when you consider that one female cat can be responsible for as
many as 20,000 descendants!"
RSPCA destroyed 35.4% of cats entering their shelters in 1995:
(see stats on page)
http://www.animalaid.org.uk/youth/topics/pets/intro.htm
Your own MYTH concerning your statement that males don't need to be neutered
since they dont have the kittens (from moggies.co.uk too!):
http://www.moggies.co.uk/html/myths.html
"MYTH: We don't need to neuter males, because they aren't the ones having
the litters.
FACT: My favorite myth...because it's the most ridiculous, yet the most
prevalent. I guess the immaculate conception explains canine and feline
pregnancies. How can you forget that it takes two!"
From the Canterbury Animal Respect Netowrk:
http://www.gn.apc.org/canterbury/carnage/PETS.HTML
"Or homeless pets may be put down; in the UK as many as 1000 healthy dogs
and 1000 healthy cats are destroyed, by the RSPCA and other animal welfare
societies, every single day because they are unwanted.
There is is feral (wild) cat problem which has reached epidemic proportions.
The feral cat is an offspring of the domesticated cat. It has become feral
because it has had no human contact. Colonies of feral cats populate cities
and are a major problem for rescue centres to deal with, as well as being a
public health risk."
Gerry
Helen
news:3b54fc93...@news.lineone.net...
> Our resident Canadian troll, Gerry, claims that millions of health
> cats are being killed each year in the UK because of a lack of homes.
Gerry a troll? Really? I don't recall ever seeing him trolling. What are you
basing this allegation on?
> I believe he is telling lies. That very few health cats are put to
> sleep by shelters in the UK.
They may not be put to sleep, but it is pretty obvious that you are not
personally involved in rescue or you would know how hard it is to cope with
all the unwanted cats in the UK. They don't just get born into loving homes,
you know.
> Does anyone know a shelter that kills cats just because they can't
> find homes for them?
The RSPCA kills cats. Funny really, considering how much dosh they've got.
Helen
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* *
Tanya's UK Feline Chronic Renal Failure Information Centre:
http://users.ouvip.com/tanya
Peter
In your recent message you wrote
>Our resident Canadian troll, Gerry, claims that millions of health
>cats are being killed each year in the UK because of a lack of homes.
Troll, is that a term of endearment?
>
>I believe he is telling lies. That very few health cats are put to
>sleep by shelters in the UK.
Depends if you class a five figure sum "a few".
>
>Does anyone know a shelter that kills cats just because they can't
>find homes for them?
Not sure if one can class the RSPCA as a shelter, but to my knowledge,
they put cats to sleep that cannot be rehomed.
Regards,
--
Peter Squires
Bob Brenchley.
>
>"Dawn Baily" <Dawn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3b54fc93...@news.lineone.net...
>> Our resident Canadian troll, Gerry, claims that millions of health
>> cats are being killed each year in the UK because of a lack of homes.
>>
>> I believe he is telling lies.
>
>First, I never lied. I only simply provided quotes and included web-links
>to various UK Animal welfare organisations
You cannot use that as an excuse. You have been told your information
is not true - why continue to spread lies?
>> That very few health cats are put to
>> sleep by shelters in the UK.
>
>Progress!! It used to be you parroted Bob Brenchley's stance that "Healthy
>cats are *never* put down in the UK".
Yes more lies from Gerry. Neither Cats Protection not Battersea will
put a healthy cat down (with the few exceptions of adult ferals that
cannot be resited. The RSPCA also intend to be no-kill by 2005 and are
already ahead of target.
> Now ask yourself this, how "few" is
>still two many? 500,000 cats? 5,000 cats? 5 cats? What number prompted
>you to believe that anyone who wants the right to indiscriminantly breed
>their moggie should, and letting their unnuetered Toms roam is ok? What
>number of cat's lives lost makes you "care"? I know we can make even more
>progress here :-)
>
>> Does anyone know a shelter that kills cats just because they can't
>> find homes for them?
>
>For the record. It was because I posted THIS (below "*****") that I've been
>branded a <other insults omitted> liar and troll by this individual:
>
>However Dawn, I suggest you take up your opposition to this public
>information provided by your shelters, animal welfare organisations, and
>Government with them. They are not my statements. I'm sorry if all these
>sites anger you. But you'll have to learn to deal with it. There are
>hundreds of other UK sites that would also anger you, I just grabbed the
>first few. It seems they *all* anger you for some reason.
>
[cut Gerry's lies for the umpteenth time]
>
>Gerry
>
>
--
Bob.
The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can be
summed up in one word -- YOU.
Peter
>they put cats to sleep that cannot be rehomed.
Excuse me for replying to my own post, but have just found this quote
which may help:
The statistics of the annual report of the Society for 1998 demonstrate
this:
28,959 dogs were rehomed
46,786 cats were rehomed
23,874 miscellaneous animals were rehomed.
821 dogs were put down because homes could not be found
1,680 cats ditto.
726 miscellaneous ditto.
12,909 dogs were put down for medical reasons
22,032 cats ditto.
52,784 miscellaneous ditto.
Rosemary Rodd
(Treasurer, Cambridge & District RSPCA branch)
A sceptic might wonder if the figures for "medical reasons" and
supposedly healthy cats that were put down are massaged, but without
first hand knowledge, who are we to doubt the figures.
Regards,
--
Peter Squires
Karen
"Peter" <pe...@squires.worldonline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Dq+iiiBg...@worldonline.co.uk...
It certainly can happen. Big scandal about "the number" of medical put downs
in San Diego being stroked. One always wonders.
Karen
Rosie Gowing
>From: Dawn...@hotmail.com (Dawn Baily)
>Date: 16/07/01 15:45 GMT Daylight Time
>Message-id: <3b54fc93...@news.lineone.net>
>
>Our resident Canadian troll, Gerry, claims that millions of health
>cats are being killed each year in the UK because of a lack of homes.
>
>sleep by shelters in the UK.
I agree.
>
>Does anyone know a shelter that kills cats just because they can't
>find homes for them?
Not that I know of.
--
Rosie
Rosie Gowing
>From: Bob Brenchley. B...@Format.Publications.ukf.net
>Date: 16/07/01 19:49 GMT Daylight Time
>Message-id: <sbd6ltk49agf98jt7...@4ax.com>
>
>On Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:55:17 GMT, "Gerry" <gma...@home.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Dawn Baily" <Dawn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:3b54fc93...@news.lineone.net...
>>> Our resident Canadian troll, Gerry, claims that millions of health
>>> cats are being killed each year in the UK because of a lack of homes.
>>>
>>> I believe he is telling lies.
>>
>>First, I never lied. I only simply provided quotes and included web-links
>>to various UK Animal welfare organisations
>
>You cannot use that as an excuse. You have been told your information
>is not true - why continue to spread lies?
>
>>> That very few health cats are put to
>>> sleep by shelters in the UK.
>>
>>Progress!! It used to be you parroted Bob Brenchley's stance that "Healthy
>>cats are *never* put down in the UK".
>
>Yes more lies from Gerry.
That is all we seem to get these days.
>Neither Cats Protection not Battersea will
>put a healthy cat down (with the few exceptions of adult ferals that
>cannot be resited. The RSPCA also intend to be no-kill by 2005 and are
>already ahead of target.
That sounds very similar to what the RSPCA told me.
--
Rosie
Gerry
"Rosie Gowing" <rosie...@aol.comno-spam> wrote in message
news:20010716164343...@ng-ct1.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Are there any KILL shelters in the UK?
> >From: Bob Brenchley. B...@Format.Publications.ukf.net
> >Date: 16/07/01 19:49 GMT Daylight Time
> >Message-id: <sbd6ltk49agf98jt7...@4ax.com>
> >
> >On Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:55:17 GMT, "Gerry" <gma...@home.com> wrote:
> >>Progress!! It used to be you parroted Bob Brenchley's stance that
"Healthy
> >>cats are *never* put down in the UK".
> >
> >Yes more lies from Gerry.
Oh this is what Bob claims? Why am I not surprised.
> That is all we seem to get these days.
Oh please. Bob changes his tune to suite his current agenda constantly, and
you know that. It's one of the main reasons (apart from nothing but
insults) he remains in my killfile. A quick search of google reveals that
Bob *has* said healthy cats were never put down in the UK many, many times.
He has also pleaded ignorance with this "if any" many times. He has done
this on this newsgroup recently as well. Here you go... Bob says:
"On Sat, 19 Aug 2000
As far as I know there are no KILL shelters in the UK. Can you show
otherwise? Yes, all the organizations do have some cats which have to be put
down, illness, age, wildness.... But healthy cats - do you know of a place?
On 13 Jul 2001
Gerry is a LIAR. On a UK group at the moment he is trolling around claiming
millions of cats are put down every year because of overpopulation. The
reality is that few, if any, healthy cats are destroyed in the UK, our
shelters are no-kill and ALL cats are found a new home. A proper home where
they can go out during the day. This hurts Gerry, because it is yet another
argument he has lost.
On uk.pets.cats.misc group, Sat, 14 Jul 2001
LIAR. Few, if indeed any, healthy cats are put down in the UK.
On Thu, 21 Dec 2000
Those that are put down are either too sick, too old or too wild to be found
homes. You have been told this before, please make sure you file it for
future reference.
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000
There is no cat population problem in the UK. If there was we would be
killing cats by the thousands or even, heaven forbid, by the million like
they do in the USA. Can't you see the connection?
On 14 Jul 2001
>Well, then what's the big deal? Apparently Britain has to euthanize cats!
Just
>like we do! Why can't he just admit it?
Because it is not true. Increasingly the name Sherry Riddles and Truth seems
to get further and further apart.
>1. Fradbo says NO healthy cats are destroyed in the UK.
>2. UK Shelters maintain they have an overpopulation problem and rehomeable
>cats are being put down because of it.
>
>1. or 2.?
I have read some total crap from you in the past - but this rubbish takes
first prize."
Gerry
Sherry
I keep telling Bob deja doesn't lie. He has boasted on about every cat
newsgroup that "healthy cats are never killed" in the UK. Personally, I think
the UK's rescue / animal welfare organizations do a marvelous job. But I always
suspected Bob was lying with that claim that NO cats were ever euthanzed unless
they were ill.
Sherry
Bob Brenchley.
And where do the facts disagree with me?
Ray
It is the RSPCA's policy to put to sleep any injured bird that cannot be
released back into the wild after 6 weeks.
I will not tollerate birds in captivity for any reason.
Ray.....Innocent Birdkeepers against RSPCA abuse.
www.BirdsUK.co.uk
www.Birduk.com
>
>
"Dawn Baily" <Dawn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3b54fc93...@news.lineone.net...
> Our resident Canadian troll, Gerry, claims that millions of health
> cats are being killed each year in the UK because of a lack of homes.
>
> I believe he is telling lies. That very few health cats are put to
> sleep by shelters in the UK.
>
> Does anyone know a shelter that kills cats just because they can't
> find homes for them?
>
>
> --
> Dawn Baily.
Rosie Gowing
>Subject: Re: Are there any KILL shelters in the UK?
>Date: 16/07/01 22:10 GMT Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20010716171005...@ng-fx1.aol.com>
Well it looks to me like Bob has been telling the truth.
I mean you defend Gerry's lies that "millions" are killed, whereas we now know
it is hundreds. In a country this size I think that is a wonderfully low
figure.
--
Rosie
Gerry
"Sherry " <srid...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010716171005...@ng-fx1.aol.com...
> I keep telling Bob deja doesn't lie. He has boasted on about every cat
> newsgroup that "healthy cats are never killed" in the UK. Personally, I
think
> the UK's rescue / animal welfare organizations do a marvelous job. But I
always
> suspected Bob was lying with that claim that NO cats were ever euthanzed
unless
> they were ill.
>
> Sherry
>
"Except at certain times of the year, and maybe in certain areas, there
is no great surplus of cats in the UK. Why am I so dammed sure of
that? Because WE DO NOT KILL OUR CATS. And believe me Phil, given
limited money, and limited housing, if there WAS a surplus then we
would have to kill."
Especially in light of this earlier comment by him:
"The CPL and Blue Cross are completely no-kill, the RSPCA destroyed
only 700 in the entire country in 1998. Each year that number drops.
Battersea put down zero. Between these big 4 they represent over 85%
of all rescued cats. And many of the smaller shelters pass part of
their 15% to the CPL if they have difficulty in finding homes."
And...
"700 is 700 too many, and the RSPCA will be the first to admit that.
They set themselves the target several years ago of achieving a
no-kill situation by 2005. If in 1998 (the year I think the report you
refer to is talking about) they were down to 700 it looks like the
will reach their target well in advance."
Rather funny isn't it? BTW, what's with this magic 700 number anyway? Was
there ever a link provided for that statistic?
Gerry
Gerry
"Rosie Gowing" <rosie...@aol.comno-spam> wrote in message
> >newsgroup that "healthy cats are never killed" in the UK. Personally, I
think
> >the UK's rescue / animal welfare organizations do a marvelous job. But I
> >always
> >suspected Bob was lying with that claim that NO cats were ever euthanzed
> >unless
> >they were ill.
> >
> >Sherry
>
> Well it looks to me like Bob has been telling the truth.
About what? ;-)
> I mean you defend Gerry's lies that "millions" are killed, whereas we now
know
> it is hundreds. In a country this size I think that is a wonderfully low
> figure.
Some UK sites give figures in millions, some thousands per day. I suggest
if you don't like what the sites have to say that you take it up with the
organisations and shelters in question and get off my back with your
infantile name calling.
Gerry
Bob Brenchley.
Sorry Gerry. But you have been told more than once that the figures
you reproduce are lies. To continue to reproduce lies after you are
mad aware of the fact that they are lies, is stupid.
--
Bob.
If you can't dazzle me with your brilliance, please don't try to
baffle me with your bullshit.
Sherry
>>newsgroup that "healthy cats are never killed" in the UK. Personally, I
>think
>>the UK's rescue / animal welfare organizations do a marvelous job. But I
>>always
>>suspected Bob was lying with that claim that NO cats were ever euthanzed
>>unless
>>they were ill.
>>
>>Sherry
>
>Well it looks to me like Bob has been telling the truth.
I don't think so. 22,000 for "medical reason" (and this figure is ALWAYS
questionable) and 600 healthy cats. And this is but ONE of your organizations.
Yes, your figures are relatively low, and I really commend the people in animal
welfare responsible for that, and the people who are responsible enough to
spay/neuter.
Sherry
Patch
> Does anyone know a shelter that kills cats just because they can't
> find homes for them?
>
The only one I know of for sure is the RSPCA. Of any small rescues I have
had direct involvement with [ and therefore know what they do, from the
inside ] not a single one will kill a healthy cat [ or dog. Or rabbit. Or
anything else ]. Its just the RSPCA who cant seem to afford extra housing
etc........ [ sorry - its a gripe I have about their stockpile of
resources - IOW money - *not* against the individual people who do work
tirelessly to help animals ].
Patch
Bob Brenchley.
>>>I keep telling Bob deja doesn't lie. He has boasted on about every cat
>>>newsgroup that "healthy cats are never killed" in the UK. Personally, I
>>think
>>>the UK's rescue / animal welfare organizations do a marvelous job. But I
>>>always
>>>suspected Bob was lying with that claim that NO cats were ever euthanzed
>>>unless
>>>they were ill.
>>>
>>>Sherry
>>
>>Well it looks to me like Bob has been telling the truth.
>
>I don't think so. 22,000 for "medical reason" (and this figure is ALWAYS
>questionable)
You must take into account that this would include a large number of
RTAs and also includes what they term voucher cases, cats taken to
normal vets by people who cannot afford to pay, the vet phones the
RSPCA and get a vouched number for part or all the costs of treatment
our euthanasia.
> and 600 healthy cats. And this is but ONE of your organizations.
But the other big ones are no-kill.
>Yes, your figures are relatively low, and I really commend the people in animal
>welfare responsible for that, and the people who are responsible enough to
>spay/neuter.
>
>Sherry
>>
>>I mean you defend Gerry's lies that "millions" are killed, whereas we now
>>know
>>it is hundreds. In a country this size I think that is a wonderfully low
>>figure.
>>
>>
>>--
>>Rosie
--
Bob.
I tell you what, you should be on educational TV, you certainly make
me feel so much smarter..?
welsh witch
"Gerry" <gma...@home.com> wrote in message
news:V%E47.490519$eK2.10...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com...
****************************
Whoever Gerry is he's done some incredibly good and thorough research.
The information he has posted is really good, but I expect he, like
all those "into" animals know quite well that that is not ALL the
truth.
The whole truth is absolutely horrendous.
The worst two things I have ever come across ...One is the Gestapo
raid on one of their own Welsh shelters.
You may read all about
the orgy of kiilling here so dreadful that it made headlines
everywhere
http://members.aol.com/walk202/bernice.htm
My nost horrible moment as I love German Shepherds so very much was
when I saw the film put out by the RSPCA themselves
and called "Animal Police"
They took a lovely German Shepherd and just because he was "old"
killed him so horribly. His veins were dropped and they had many, many
jabs to try to bring one up..the poor dog screamed the while and
looked terrified at present I only have stills from that film but now
we have a video card and can do real video for anyone who can stand
it....and if I can stand to do it later
http://www.homeusers.prestel.co.uk/jewelion/walk2/helloframe.htm
I simply cannot look at this without being extremely upset but if its
one thing I do for German Shepherds I will show th way in which one of
them was tortured and they being so proud of it that they displayed it
on TV thinking it would incite the terror of everyone (explain later)
HOWEVER the programme receive so many complaints from so many
different people including vets who were horrified at the
"inarticulate" way in which the killing was done I say that because
they cannot connect with animals in heir own terms.
AND what about the latest story of betrayal of a very kind lady who
obviously loved her dog. Remember Bob Dylan's line "I gave her my
heart but she wanted my soul"...............She gave them all her
money and they then killed her dog..."but he was
old........"((..reminds me also of the National Health Service....how
many patients have DNR (do not resuscitate) writtten on their
notes..and if they're in a long term care home if it applies have
"This patient own own house")))
Sooooooooooooo much money they have and yet they can do the things
they do.
Childs healthy cat killed http://www.walk-wales.org.uk/catstory.htm
They bastards also killed yet another German Shepherd
http://www.walk-wales.org.uk/anguish.htm They fill me with rage so
much with their attitude to GSD after all these dogs would so
willingly lay down their lives for their human. They give the human
race so much.
I have put midi music on the sites although it is poor in comparison
to MP3 and real, we in Wales (the Land of Song) believe that it puts
you in touch with sympathetic forces.
AND if you think its bad.....the way they treat animals.......Humans
don't stand a chance.The latest atrocity
I personally had a telephone call from a lady. The call came from the
local hospital wherein people go to recover from mental collapse.
She told me a long tale of woe. Her husband had left her and she had
lots of animals to cope with. She bcame ill. The RSPCA of course
visited the sick like they do!! She ended up in hospital driven
nuts.....BUT she was indeed more ill than she thought for it was
discovered before her hospitalisation that she had breast
cancer.....in one breast....then not too much later in the other. She
is not allowed to have a pair of tights or stockings because the
hospital staff think she would finish her own life. She told me all
this story herself. I have not of course spoken to anyone who has
treated her. Her doctor would not hopefully talk to an outsider. I
certainly spoke to her in the hospital because I had to ring her back
when she asked for help...
It here may be noted that those who help people with animals are often
those who give extremely generous assistance too who know just what
the RSPCA is all about.
In no way should they be called a charity and in no way should they
have charitable status. They have collected a huge amount of money and
who was it that said "Every man has his price"
I have been told that lots by people who work for the RSPCA. Ask where
they invest their money....mentioning South Africa.I don't know if
they've changed sicne complaints. Ask if they've ever put dogs down to
save themselves paying staff to look after the animals.
Ask how many people dare to say anything detrimental to this mafia of
th dog world. Ask how many witnesses canno be bought from their "slush
fund"
£5,000 may tempt some people.
If you've got money to burn give it to the PDSA who care for people
and animals or Gwent Animal Rescue run by a lady we know to be
genuine.
Blimey! Did I really write all that!!!
http://www.walk-wales.org.uk
http://www.rogerdean.com
>
>
>
Rosie Gowing
>Message-id: <20010716184407...@ng-ct1.aol.com>
>
>>>I keep telling Bob deja doesn't lie. He has boasted on about every cat
>>>newsgroup that "healthy cats are never killed" in the UK. Personally, I
>>think
>>>the UK's rescue / animal welfare organizations do a marvelous job. But I
>>>always
>>>suspected Bob was lying with that claim that NO cats were ever euthanzed
>>>unless
>>>they were ill.
>>>
>>>Sherry
>>
>>Well it looks to me like Bob has been telling the truth.
>
>I don't think so.
Well what is very clear is that his version of the truth is a lot nearer to
reality than the one promoted by Gerry-troll.
>22,000 for "medical reason" (and this figure is ALWAYS
>questionable) and 600 healthy cats. And this is but ONE of your
>organizations.
Duh! It is the only national rescue organisation that does kill. What other
rescue organizations are you talking about?
>Yes, your figures are relatively low,
Relatively low? God woman, compared to your country that figure is so close to
zero it's fantastic. Why aren't you clamouring to find out how we do it?
>and I really commend the people in
>animal
>welfare responsible for that, and the people who are responsible enough to
>spay/neuter.
It is down to the people of the UK who respect cats and give them what the need
in life.
Rosie Gowing
>Date: 16/07/01 23:49 GMT Daylight Time
>Message-id: <aaK47.40012$WS4.6...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com>
It seems that the lies Gerry-troll promotes are looking like complete works of
fiction rather than just exaggerations.
--
Rosie
Patch
"welsh witch" <welsh...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9j0mgc$8kd$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com...
> My nost horrible moment as I love German Shepherds so very much was
> when I saw the film put out by the RSPCA themselves
> and called "Animal Police"
> They took a lovely German Shepherd and just because he was "old"
> killed him so horribly. His veins were dropped and they had many, many
> jabs to try to bring one up..the poor dog screamed the while and
> looked terrified
I remember that one all too well. I still have bad dreams about it, and
tears well up every time I think of it, which is *very* often. What sickens
me is that the RSPCA didn't even bother advertising that lovely lad - they
just assumed he wouldn't get a home because of being 12 years old. I would
*guarantee*, had they put him on the news the day they picked him up, he
would have been in a new home within a couple of hours [ and that's just to
account for home check time ].
For anyone wondering, it was Manchester RSPCA, and it was the inspector who
picked the boy up, who made the decision off his own bat, and took him
straight to the vet where he was treated in the most disgusting, inhumane
manner, and that lad died in absolute terror. The same inspector himself
killed a litter of puppies that had been born a few hours earlier. `Scuse
me, RSPCA, it is *NOT* good enough. The Alsatian, and those pups would have
been offered homes before the news bulletin was over, had they f****ng well
bothered to do one. Its time that organisation had some sweeping changes.
Sorry for the outburst, but what they did to that poor dog makes me angry to
bursting point.
Patch
Sherry
>picked the boy up, who made the decision off his own bat, and took him
>straight to the vet where he was treated in the most disgusting, inhumane
>manner, and that lad died in absolute terror. The same inspector himself
>killed a litter of puppies that had been born a few hours earlier. `Scuse
>me, RSPCA, it is *NOT* good enough. The Alsatian, and those pups would have
>been offered homes before the news bulletin was over, had they f****ng well
>bothered to do one. Its time that organisation had some sweeping changes.
>
>Sorry for the outburst, but what they did to that poor dog makes me angry to
>bursting point.
>
>Patch
No animal deserves to die in absolute terror. NOT ONE. If euthanasia is
necessary, we owe them a humane, peaceful end. Sorry for the rant, but we got a
report that a nearby small town was trapping skunks, and simply leaving them in
the traps and drowning them in a water tank. Can you imagine being in a covered
trap and being drowned? We let them know it was *not* acceptable, and pretty
much got laughed at. It took the intervention of a humane legal enforcement
protection group to get it stopped, but we did it. I don't care if it's a dog,
cat, skunk, or a steer that's going to end up on your dinner table. They
deserve a humane end.
Sherry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Ray
I have been thrown into the anti AR thing , the only shelters i can find
that are worth trusting (there may be others out there) are PDSA and Blue
Cross.
Stay away from the rest, they are only after your money
Dawn Baily wrote in message <3b54fc93...@news.lineone.net>...
>Our resident Canadian troll, Gerry, claims that millions of health
>cats are being killed each year in the UK because of a lack of homes.
>
>I believe he is telling lies. That very few health cats are put to
>sleep by shelters in the UK.
>
>Does anyone know a shelter that kills cats just because they can't
>find homes for them?
>
>
>--
>Dawn Baily.
Ray
Rosie Gowing wrote in message
<20010716164343...@ng-ct1.aol.com>...
>>Subject: Re: Are there any KILL shelters in the UK?
>>put a healthy cat down (with the few exceptions of adult ferals that
>>cannot be resited. The RSPCA also intend to be no-kill by 2005 and are
>>already ahead of target.
>
>That sounds very similar to what the RSPCA told me.
And i suppose the RSPCA would not lie, It is well known about the killings
the RSPCA does, but it is ok if it is for medical reasons.
They dont care about animals they only care about cash,
>
>
>--
>Rosie
>
>
Ray
reasons????
how easy those figures can be doctored, I can just see it now the big cash
grabbing adverts
"we have achieved our goal on no kill by 2005, in order to keep this goal
we need cash "
p.s. our medical kill has risen by the same amount our other kill used to be
what a coincedence?????????????????????????
money grabbin pet killing, rare animal
thieving......................................
Gerry wrote in message ...
Ray
would love that, especially if we bring cases like winghaven/birdhaven back
into light, and Fridays star cutting, and the corruption with that big pet
chain
welsh witch wrote in message <9j0mgc$8kd$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com>...
>
>
Ray
should be put on DWA,
But i wholy agree with patch, those animals should have a right to live,and
die to an old age, what gives that B*****D the devine right to say what
lives or dies????
Patch wrote in message ...
Ray
Rosie Gowing wrote in message
>>I believe he is telling lies. That very few health cats are put to
>>sleep by shelters in the UK.
>
>I agree.
>>
>>Does anyone know a shelter that kills cats just because they can't
>>find homes for them?
>
>Not that I know of.
>
>
say the RSPCA? or is it thier own figures which you cannot believe.
It hurts when something you believed in and supported turns out to be your
worst night mare, unfortunatly alot more people will have this nightmare
now the RSPCA are being seen for what they really are, money grabbing ,
animal killing B*****ds
The truth really does hurt.
>--
>Rosie
>
>
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>is that no kill by 2005 fullstop, or no kill by2005 apart from medical
>reasons????
There will always be medical reasons.
>
>how easy those figures can be doctored, I can just see it now the big cash
>grabbing adverts
>
> "we have achieved our goal on no kill by 2005, in order to keep this goal
>we need cash "
>
>p.s. our medical kill has risen by the same amount our other kill used to be
>what a coincedence?????????????????????????
>
>money grabbin pet killing, rare animal
>thieving......................................
Mmmmm. I see.
--
Bob.
I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
public.
Rosie Gowing
>Date: 17/07/01 12:17 GMT Daylight Time
>Message-id: <99536894...@igateway.postoffice.co.uk>
>
>is that no kill by 2005 fullstop, or no kill by2005 apart from medical
>reasons????
>
>how easy those figures can be doctored, I can just see it now the big cash
>grabbing adverts
>
> "we have achieved our goal on no kill by 2005, in order to keep this goal
>we need cash "
>
>p.s. our medical kill has risen by the same amount our other kill used to be
>what a coincedence?????????????????????????
>
>money grabbin pet killing, rare animal
>thieving......................................
>
Do you live in the same country as me? The RSPCA may not be perfect, but
neither are they that bad.
--
Rosie
Alison
I know you're angry but the RSPCA can't find homes for all the unwanted
animals. You can't find homes for all the old animals. You can find a home
for any animal that is shown on the telly or in the national papers but
advertising in the local free paper doesn't always work even with a photo.
People don't want old dogs or nervous dogs or dogs with problems. They
walk by them at the kennels and these dogs are left to rot for months .Not
every one is as kind hearted as us . They 're not willing to take these dogs
on. The RSPCA just try to clear up the mess that is created by a stupid
ignoramus public.
The RSPCA needs to get rid of the Old Guard and modernise itself but
people need to be realistic. It's not possible to re home every unwanted pet
in Britain.
Ally
Patch <d.guipag...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:v4U47.56552$B56.11...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
Patch
"Alison" <alis...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9j26ln$lr2vv$1...@ID-80210.news.dfncis.de...
> Patch,
> I know you're angry but the RSPCA can't find homes for all the unwanted
> animals.
They didnt even try though, he just made an instant judgment, and was very
wrong.
You can't find homes for all the old animals.
There is a specialist rescue down South for unwanted elderly dogs - he could
have called them.
You can find a home
> for any animal that is shown on the telly or in the national papers but
> advertising in the local free paper doesn't always work even with a photo.
They filmed it - they could have given the film to a local TV station, or
for a National broadcast on the news.
> People don't want old dogs
My Daisy-May was 15 when I got her. I was called recently by my vet to help
with an 11 year old crossbreed which was taken in by his owners to be put
down as they were emigrating. My vet refused to put him down as he was in
good health, had them sign him over, and started phoning round. It was after
5pm so the regular contacts were not available [ office hours contacts ], so
he called me. I picked him up 10 minutes later, and he was in his new home
the next day, is *very* happy and absolutely doted on.......
or nervous dogs or dogs with problems.
Willow ? Gremlin ? Defa ?
They
> walk by them at the kennels and these dogs are left to rot for months
.Not
> every one is as kind hearted as us .
But there are far more than is realised.
They 're not willing to take these dogs
> on.
Put it this way. Had he been shown on TV that day, and I`d seen it, I could
have had hubby make a phone call to a relative of his in Manchester, had
them pick the boy up, and I`ve had collected him the next day, either to
rehome him, or to keep him myself. There are many other people like me, who
feel that way. I`m nothing special, and not blowing my own trumpet, just
trying to explain that these dogs are got rid of before people like me have
the chance to do something.
The b****rd didnt bother calling Alsatian Rescue either, or the NCDL, so
with those, and the elderly dog rescue, he refused that dog three other
avenues. He had no right to do what he did without making every effort to
find the lad a place.
The RSPCA just try to clear up the mess that is created by a stupid
> ignoramus public.
Many do, yes, and I am not griping at every one in the RSPCA, or connected
to it by any means, heck one of my very good friends is an RSPCA Chief
Inspector, but *some* of them make me angry enough to behave in a way not
fitting with polite society.
> The RSPCA needs to get rid of the Old Guard and modernise itself but
> people need to be realistic.
They should start by getting rid of that callous b****rd. They could send
him my way so I can show him how "unhomeable" dogs can turn out.
It's not possible to re home every unwanted pet
> in Britain.
It will be - if the public kick up enough about the only organisation which
still kills instead of using their [vast] resources better. And with more
owner education, etc etc of course. The UK , as a whole, is certainly
getting on top of it, generally, but yes, it must be improved more.
Patch
welsh witch
--
http://www.walk-wales.org.uk
http://www.rogerdean.com
"Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:99536924...@igateway.postoffice.co.uk...
There's a lot of the RSPCA members who actually want HM the Queen
removed as their Patron
http://www.walk-wales.org.uk/RSPCAandHM.htm
I think I shall go on the royal website and complain to HM. If you
write to Prince Charles from a Welsh address he always answers!
http://www.walk-wales.org.uk
http://www.rogerdean.com
welsh witch
"Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:99536894...@igateway.postoffice.co.uk...
> is that no kill by 2005 fullstop, or no kill by2005 apart from
medical
> reasons????
>
> how easy those figures can be doctored, I can just see it now the
big cash
> grabbing adverts
>
> "we have achieved our goal on no kill by 2005, in order to keep
this goal
> we need cash "
>
> p.s. our medical kill has risen by the same amount our other kill
used to be
> what a coincedence?????????????????????????
>
> money grabbin pet killing, rare animal
> thieving......................................
>
Its the thieving bit that's really weird and how they get away with
it. Did you by chance read the sory of the cttle they stole froma
gewntleman in south Wales then would you believe took them to the
slaughter house and got.....guess what £3,000 my goodness they were
some poor cattle weren't they?!!!
Here's the story from
http://www.homeusers.prestel.co.uk/jewelion/walk/index2.htm
How much do you think the Gatheral's dogs were worth. They were
champion stock all of them and the ladies were judges on had just
judged Crufts. They frightened the ladies into signing over all the
dogs the them. These poor ladies had let everything get on top of them
They have taken away th very valuable dogs of more than one top show
judge. The dogs believe me would "scrub up very nicely" They
threatened to take away Freda Cookes' home. She was world famous in
Westies and able to sell her puppies for thousands. Freda was
eccentric fine..why not all Brits have the reputation for being
eccentric, I like it but that qwas a great excuse.
Dogs have no aesthetic sense and don't care how smart or otherwise
they are....Dr Helen Hein ws another person who had done invaluable
service to the dog community look how she was treated. Any sign of
illness or weakness and they leap upon people to further compound
their sad circumstances.
There is a well known psychological problem that effects ladies
usually unmarried ladies who cannot part with their animals (don't we
know it) and even collect more of them. The RSPCA know perfectly well
about the condition as they said in an interview..yet they still
torture these people.
The RSPCA are only supported by the media because they help make them
lots and lots of cash by selling stories . The NOWorld news desk told
me the best stories money wise are the Royals and then the ones about
animals being rescued.....any fiction writers care to apply to the
RSPCA?
If you have any spare cash give it to the PDSA or Gwent Animal
Rescue!! Don't forget all you rich people out there
http://www.walk-wales.org.uk
http://www.rogerdean.com
Ray
>>>I mean you defend Gerry's lies that "millions" are killed, whereas we now
>>>know
>>>it is hundreds. In a country this size I think that is a wonderfully low
>>>figure.
>
>
still think its to many especially wheen people are donating monies to "fat
cat" charities who kill animals for financial "intrest",
>--
>Rosie
>
>
John M Ward
welsh witch <welsh...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> I think I shall go on the royal website and complain to HM. If you
> write to Prince Charles from a Welsh address he always answers!
Now there's something I didn't know! Now, how does one arrange to have a
Welsh address, I wonder? (not that I have anything sufficiently informed to
write, but others here might like to do so.)
--
John M Ward
Writing with the aid (or hindrance) of Scooter, my small black feline friend.
Scooter's bio, photos, "Scratchings" column and "Ask Scooter" facility at:
http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/johnward/
"A Human Being is just a Cat's way of opening tins."
Ray
Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>On Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:17:24 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>is that no kill by 2005 fullstop, or no kill by2005 apart from medical
>>reasons????
>
>There will always be medical reasons.
Ah i see so 2 hairs missing from a dogs back will mean mange so it must be
destroyed, or any other feeble excuse to kill an animal to save money
>>
>>how easy those figures can be doctored, I can just see it now the big
cash
>>grabbing adverts
>>
>> "we have achieved our goal on no kill by 2005, in order to keep this goal
>>we need cash "
>>
>>p.s. our medical kill has risen by the same amount our other kill used to
be
>>what a coincedence?????????????????????????
>>
>>money grabbin pet killing, rare animal
>>thieving......................................
>
>Mmmmm. I see.
>
>--
>Bob.
>
>I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
>public.
Dont be silly, i am aware of your loyalties towards the RSPCA, you are the
one who should feel humiliated, and if you do not, for your part in the
RSPCA death camps then i say you are hartless and no better than Mengel
himself.
Ray
Rosie Gowing wrote in message
There are a few other charities without the death mask of the RSPCA
>
>If you believe that, then you can not be living in England.
Winghaven/Birdhaven, RSPCA officer tries to forge evedece by injuring birds
of prey to convict an oap, who refused any more help to the RSPCA unless he
got somer financial assistance for the birds they brought to him. The RSPCA
officer was filmed by a next door neighbour,
Fridays Daily Star 13th july 2001, need i repeat this
RSPCA "donate" £1.2 million pounds, (thats a load of animal medication,
food, housing) to the labour government for legislation that in the end
gives you no more rights than before,
Kill exotic animals because " they cannot rehouse them " even though there
are hundreds of keepers willing to take in unwanteds,
Let places like the big pet store chains, run a reighn of cruelty, but do
not do anything in case the donations from the chain stop.
Support groups which are trying to ban trade fairs/shows , where there is
underone roof, the most knowledge in the exotic field, but these people do
not "donate" thats a bad word,, these people do not Pay the rspca to be left
alone, but they are persecuted??
Kill more animals than they let live
Do you want me to carry on?
>--
>Rosie
>
>
Ray
welsh witch wrote in message <9j3do9$6nh$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>...
>> Could we try petitioning for the Royal Status to be removed? the
>media
>> would love that, especially if we bring cases like
>winghaven/birdhaven back
>> into light, and Fridays star cutting, and the corruption with that
>big pet
>> chain
>>
>>
>> welsh witch wrote in message
><9j0mgc$8kd$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com>...
>There's a lot of the RSPCA members who actually want HM the Queen
>removed as their Patron
WHY? any self respecting honest charity would love the Queen to be
thier patron (i am not a royalist, my country has no royal famly)
WHY? this dont make sense, could there be an infiltration of AR?
taking over the cash? they way the RSPCA act makes one think, they act
more like an AR movement than a charity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think this needs to be investigated, who would investigate such
things?????
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>
>Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:17:24 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>is that no kill by 2005 fullstop, or no kill by2005 apart from medical
>>>reasons????
>>
>>There will always be medical reasons.
>
>Ah i see so 2 hairs missing from a dogs back will mean mange so it must be
>destroyed, or any other feeble excuse to kill an animal to save money
I believe you are being very stupid.
>
>>>
>>>how easy those figures can be doctored, I can just see it now the big
>cash
>>>grabbing adverts
>>>
>>> "we have achieved our goal on no kill by 2005, in order to keep this goal
>>>we need cash "
>>>
>>>p.s. our medical kill has risen by the same amount our other kill used to
>be
>>>what a coincedence?????????????????????????
>>>
>>>money grabbin pet killing, rare animal
>>>thieving......................................
>>
>>Mmmmm. I see.
>>
>>--
>>Bob.
>>
>>I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
>>public.
>
>Dont be silly, i am aware of your loyalties towards the RSPCA, you are the
>one who should feel humiliated, and if you do not, for your part in the
>RSPCA death camps then i say you are hartless and no better than Mengel
>himself.
And I believe you know little of what you are talking about. Oh sure
there will be some cases, no system as large and complex as the RSPCA
can be perfect, but they are the exception - not the rule.
Given the number of animals they treat, and the fact that they are
seen as an emergency service for animals in distress, I don't find the
figures given at all worrying.
--
Bob.
A child of five could understand this! Fetch me a child of five!
Alison
If there were more people like you there wouldn't be a problem . Did you
intend to keep your dogs for good or were you just fostering. Most of my
pets were fosters and I decided to keep them.
Ally
Patch <d.guipag...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:ed457.45535$WS4.6...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
Patch
> Hi Patch,
> If there were more people like you there wouldn't be a problem . Did you
> intend to keep your dogs for good or were you just fostering. Most of my
> pets were fosters and I decided to keep them.
> Ally
I always look at each foster as a potential permanent, in case they are more
"difficult" than the average home might be prepared to deal with [ that
sounds awful, but its not meant in a bad way !!!!!! ].
I had no doubt that Grem. Willow and Defa would be permanent, but I`ve had
several fosters through that were borderline but with a little patience and
effort, became perfectly able to go to an "average" home [ though, when I
home check, I have to admit, I expect more than "average" <g> ].
I`d love to have a pup again [ its been a loooong time since I had a dog
from a pup ], but I cant justify that to my conscience to be honest. I have
to make sure I will always have room for a desperate adult "sad case", so no
pups for me, unless they were "special care" from the off.
I was considering a blind Collie recently - when I hear of particular cases,
I set myself a time limit of "if it doesnt have a home within X amount of
time", I`ll make an approach, but I`m thrilled to say, the blind lass has
had an offer of a home, so fingers crossed, all will go well for her.
Patch :-)
wendy
What a grand person you are Patch, it's nice to know there are people like
you around to help unfortunate animals. I would love to be able to take in
dogs etc. but I run a small pet rodent rescue and I also have three dogs of
my own and a stray cat that I feed and try to take care of (I say stray, it
may not be) so I am kept pretty busy, but you never know what's a round the
corner. Though it might sound a little cheesy, you are a special person
Patch and I hope you are appreciated.
wendy ;o))))
Patch
"wendy" <wend...@rodentrescue.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9j54qm$t3l$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
Heh, nothing so heroic - I`m just a soft touch <bg>
I would love to be able to take in
> dogs etc. but I run a small pet rodent rescue and I also have three dogs
of
> my own and a stray cat that I feed and try to take care of (I say stray,
it
> may not be) so I am kept pretty busy, but you never know what's a round
the
> corner.
Come on now, how many people do rodent rescue compared to cats and dogs, eh
? You are every bit as valuable to animals, probably more so - rodent
rescuers are somewhat rarer than other types of rescuers, so dont you go
feeling guilty, or making apologies about not taking in dogs as well !!!!!
I`d love to be doing bird rescue, but I dont have the facilities for good
sized outdoor aviaries that allow some flight, so until then, I wont do it,
as I would be doing birds a disservice if I cant give them what they need -
half assed rehab is not much better than no rehab at all. So should I feel
bad in the meantime ?
No, and nor should you :-)
Though it might sound a little cheesy, you are a special person
> Patch and I hope you are appreciated.
My mob say they love cheese, and that they appreciate me, so I`m more than
happy with that <g>
Fanx Wendy :-))
Patch
Rosie Gowing
>Message-id: <99546423...@igateway.postoffice.co.uk>
>
>
>Kill more animals than they let live
>
>Do you want me to carry on?
You can if you like, but I think you are making a fool of yourself.
--
Rosie
Rosie Gowing
>Message-id: <99536952...@igateway.postoffice.co.uk>
>
>I was attacked when i was 9 years old, and i strongly believe that all dogs
>should be put on DWA,
>
> But i wholy agree with patch, those animals should have a right to live,and
>die to an old age, what gives that B*****D the devine right to say what
>lives or dies????
>
>
What is DWA?
--
Rosie
Ray
Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:29:32 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>>>On Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:17:24 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>is that no kill by 2005 fullstop, or no kill by2005 apart from medical
>>>>reasons????
>>>
>>>There will always be medical reasons.
>>
>>Ah i see so 2 hairs missing from a dogs back will mean mange so it must be
>>destroyed, or any other feeble excuse to kill an animal to save money
>
>I believe you are being very stupid.
I would rather be stupid than be associated with an organisation that kills
healthy animals for no reason other than saving money
Ray
Rosie Gowing wrote in message
where in the following am i making a fool of myself????
>
>Winghaven/Birdhaven, RSPCA officer tries to forge evedece by injuring birds
of prey to convict an oap, who refused any more help to the RSPCA unless he
got somer financial assistance for the birds they brought to him. The RSPCA
officer was filmed by a next door neighbour,
Fridays Daily Star 13th july 2001, need i repeat this
RSPCA "donate" £1.2 million pounds, (thats a load of animal medication,
food, housing) to the labour government for legislation that in the end
gives you no more rights than before,
Kill exotic animals because " they cannot rehouse them " even though there
are hundreds of keepers willing to take in unwanteds,
Let places like the big pet store chains, run a reighn of cruelty, but do
not do anything in case the donations from the chain stop.
Support groups which are trying to ban trade fairs/shows , where there is
underone roof, the most knowledge in the exotic field, but these people do
not "donate" thats a bad word,, these people do not Pay the rspca to be left
alone, but they are persecuted??
Kill more animals than they let live
>--
>Rosie
>
>
Ray
Rosie Gowing wrote in message
Dangerous Wild Animals licence
>
>
>--
>Rosie
>
>
Ray
Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>You must take into account that this would include a large number of
>RTAs and also includes what they term voucher cases, cats taken to
>normal vets by people who cannot afford to pay, the vet phones the
>RSPCA and get a vouched number for part or all the costs of treatment
>our euthanasia.
is this because euthanasia, is cheaper than that keeping the animal alive
and keeping it untill it is rehomed???????
Bob Brenchley
wrote:
No. Not with voucher cases, that is 100% up to the vet.
--
Bob.
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
Bob Brenchley
wrote:
>>>Ah i see so 2 hairs missing from a dogs back will mean mange so it must be
>>>destroyed, or any other feeble excuse to kill an animal to save money
>>
>>I believe you are being very stupid.
>
>I would rather be stupid than be associated with an organisation that kills
>healthy animals for no reason other than saving money
Actually, I don't think the RSPCA should be involved in shelter work
on cats and dogs. Rescue and emergency yes, rehoming no.
--
Bob.
What do little birdies see when they get knocked unconscious?
Sherry
>>>You must take into account that this would include a large number of
>>>RTAs and also includes what they term voucher cases, cats taken to
>>>normal vets by people who cannot afford to pay, the vet phones the
>>>RSPCA and get a vouched number for part or all the costs of treatment
>>>our euthanasia.
>>
>>is this because euthanasia, is cheaper than that keeping the animal alive
>>and keeping it untill it is rehomed???????
>
>No. Not with voucher cases, that is 100% up to the
Bob, could you please paste so that I am not attributed words I did not write.
None of this was written by me.
Declaw-SLK03
>>>>On 16 Jul 2001 22:44:07 GMT, srid...@aol.com (Sherry ) wrote:
>>>>You must take into account that this would include a large number of
>>>>RTAs and also includes what they term voucher cases, cats taken to
>>>>normal vets by people who cannot afford to pay, the vet phones the
>>>>RSPCA and get a vouched number for part or all the costs of treatment
>>>>our euthanasia.
>>>
>>>is this because euthanasia, is cheaper than that keeping the animal alive
>>>and keeping it untill it is rehomed???????
>>
>>No. Not with voucher cases, that is 100% up to the
>
>Bob, could you please paste so that I am not attributed words I did not write.
>None of this was written by me.
Speak to the person who mucked up the post. I clearly state who I'm
replying to, that is automatic.
>>
>>--
>>Bob.
>>
>>I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>>>>On 16 Jul 2001 22:44:07 GMT, srid...@aol.com (Sherry ) wrote:
>>>>You must take into account that this would include a large number of
>>>>RTAs and also includes what they term voucher cases, cats taken to
>>>>normal vets by people who cannot afford to pay, the vet phones the
>>>>RSPCA and get a vouched number for part or all the costs of treatment
>>>>our euthanasia.
>>>
>>>is this because euthanasia, is cheaper than that keeping the animal alive
>>>and keeping it untill it is rehomed???????
>>
>>No. Not with voucher cases, that is 100% up to the vet.
>>
>>--
>>Bob.
>>
>>I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Ray
Bob Brenchley wrote in message ...
>On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:34:14 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>>Ah i see so 2 hairs missing from a dogs back will mean mange so it must
be
>>>>destroyed, or any other feeble excuse to kill an animal to save money
>>>
>>>I believe you are being very stupid.
>>
>>I would rather be stupid than be associated with an organisation that
kills
>>healthy animals for no reason other than saving money
>
>Actually, I don't think the RSPCA should be involved in shelter work
>on cats and dogs. Rescue and emergency yes, rehoming no.
>
I didnt mention shelter work, nor did i specificly target the RSPCA in that
statement, is this a bit of a self confesion????
Are you saying then that if the RSPCA was only involved in Rescue and
emergency , they would kill fewer animals to save money?????
And folowing on from that , are you also agreeing that the RSPCA kills
healthy animals to save money????
Ray
looking for more rodents
Ray
Patch wrote in message ...
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>
>Bob Brenchley wrote in message ...
>>On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:34:14 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>>Ah i see so 2 hairs missing from a dogs back will mean mange so it must
>be
>>>>>destroyed, or any other feeble excuse to kill an animal to save money
>>>>
>>>>I believe you are being very stupid.
>>>
>>>I would rather be stupid than be associated with an organisation that
>kills
>>>healthy animals for no reason other than saving money
>>
>>Actually, I don't think the RSPCA should be involved in shelter work
>>on cats and dogs. Rescue and emergency yes, rehoming no.
>>
>
>I didnt mention shelter work, nor did i specificly target the RSPCA in that
>statement, is this a bit of a self confesion????
Well since we have been talking about the RSPCA.....
>
>Are you saying then that if the RSPCA was only involved in Rescue and
>emergency , they would kill fewer animals to save money?????
If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
healthy animals to kill.
>
>And folowing on from that , are you also agreeing that the RSPCA kills
>healthy animals to save money????
Not at all, I don't believe that for one moment.
Ray
Sherry wrote in message <20010716184407...@ng-ct1.aol.com>...
>>Well it looks to me like Bob has been telling the truth.
>
>I don't think so.
neither do i He is pro RSPCA, they kill animals and lie about it, take money
through conning people, why should he be any different
22,000 for "medical reason" (and this figure is ALWAYS
>questionable) and 600 healthy cats. And this is but ONE of your
organizations.
>Yes, your figures are relatively low, and I really commend the people in
animal
>welfare responsible for that, and the people who are responsible enough to
>spay/neuter.
>
>Sherry
>>
>>I mean you defend Gerry's lies that "millions" are killed, whereas we now
>>know
>>it is hundreds. In a country this size I think that is a wonderfully low
>>figure.
>>
>>
>>--
>>Rosie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Ray
Bob Brenchley. wrote in message
>On Fri, 20 Jul 2001 11:07:09 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>Bob Brenchley wrote in message ...
>>>On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:34:14 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>Ah i see so 2 hairs missing from a dogs back will mean mange so it
must
>>be
>>>>>>destroyed, or any other feeble excuse to kill an animal to save money
>>>>>
>>>>>I believe you are being very stupid.
>>>>
>>>>I would rather be stupid than be associated with an organisation that
>>kills
>>>>healthy animals for no reason other than saving money
>>>
>>>Actually, I don't think the RSPCA should be involved in shelter work
>>>on cats and dogs. Rescue and emergency yes, rehoming no.
>>>
>>
>>I didnt mention shelter work, nor did i specificly target the RSPCA in
that
>>statement, is this a bit of a self confesion????
>
>Well since we have been talking about the RSPCA.....
>
>>
>>Are you saying then that if the RSPCA was only involved in Rescue and
>>emergency , they would kill fewer animals to save money?????
>
>If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
>healthy animals to kill.
So from what you have just said any rescue/emergency animal is not healthy
so have to be killed?
Ray
Dawn Baily wrote in message <3b5d8c4c...@news.lineone.net>...
>Just to annoy the world "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com> wrote the
>following on Thu, 19 Jul 2001 17:37:34 +0100:
Yes I think all dogs should be on DWA and have to be muzzled, all other
related animals have to be and i dont see the differance, wolf, dingo,
huntingdog hyena, DWA required by all but why not dogs? Strangely enough
the RSPCA are on the DWA commitee which discusss and decides what animals
remain on DWA and which come off. The RSPCA are trying to get most reptiles
put on DWA, (we can go into thier reasons another time) when was the last
time you heard of someone having thier face ripped to pieces by a garter
snake or a loepard gecko, or a frog??? but a child being attacked and
mauled by a dog 5-6 weeks ago.
>Stupid or what?
>
>No physicaly, and mentally scarred, imagine being 9 years old, getting out
of the back door of your fathers car, just getting your feet onto the ground
to stand up when a standard poodle (bred for hunting) leaps up at you,
pushing you to the ground between the car and the car door, jamed against
the petrol pump where no o0ne has a clear view of what is going on untill
they hear my screams, a barking and clawing at your back, then biting into
your neck, let that happen to you and see how you feel, then you would be in
a position to call some one stupid, for trying to stop the same happening to
other kids.
>--
>Dawn Baily.
Patch
"Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> Yes I think all dogs should be on DWA and have to be muzzled, all other
> related animals have to be and i dont see the differance, wolf, dingo,
> huntingdog hyena, DWA required by all but why not dogs? Strangely enough
> the RSPCA are on the DWA commitee which discusss and decides what animals
> remain on DWA and which come off. The RSPCA are trying to get most
reptiles
> put on DWA, (we can go into thier reasons another time) when was the last
> time you heard of someone having thier face ripped to pieces by a garter
> snake or a loepard gecko, or a frog??? but a child being attacked and
> mauled by a dog 5-6 weeks ago.
Then, by your "reasoning", *all* men should be castrated to prevent rapes
committed by a small proportion of them.
Does that put it in perspective for you ?
OK, you had a bad experience, but its usually owners, who are negligent and
ignorant about training and socialisation, who are to blame for attacks by
their dogs, not the dog itself.
Patch
Benjamin Franklin
> >You think ALL dogs should be treated a dangerous wild animals?
>
> Yes I think all dogs should be on DWA and have to be muzzled, all other
> related animals have to be and i dont see the differance, wolf, dingo,
> huntingdog hyena, DWA required by all but why not dogs? Strangely enough
> the RSPCA are on the DWA commitee which discusss and decides what animals
> remain on DWA and which come off. The RSPCA are trying to get most
reptiles
> put on DWA, (we can go into thier reasons another time) when was the last
> time you heard of someone having thier face ripped to pieces by a garter
> snake or a loepard gecko, or a frog??? but a child being attacked and
> mauled by a dog 5-6 weeks ago.
>
There is a world of difference between wolves, dingoes, hyenas and the
domestic pet dog. It's the owners of dogs who should be licensed in many
cases. I was visiting Liverpool a few weeks ago and I was horrified to see
in the city centre loutish young men with Japanese Akitas. These seem to be
the latest fashion accessory for the thugs. These dogs probably won't have
been socialised as pups and are a disaster waiting to happen.
In the past twelve months, in the village where I live, we have had two dogs
killed by a Rotweiller and a German Shepherd. The Rotweiller escaped from
the owner's garden and went on the rampage. It killed a ten week old puppy
that was playing with its young owner in their front garden. The German
Shepherd attacked and killed an elderly Corgi, which was on a leash, and
being taken for a walk by its elderly owner. In neither instance was any
action taken by the authorities. The German Shepherd is still regularly
exercised off its leash on the local playing field.
I own a cocker spaniel who has a lovely, friendly temperament with other
dogs and with people, and I worry when I am out with him as so many people
walk their dogs without any control and it seems that nothing can be done
about it.
Ben
Ray
went up to liverpool a couple of years back and saw packs of dogs mostly
brown mongerels but with a dalmation and another different coloured dog
amongst them.
Benjamin Franklin wrote in message ...
Ray
Dawn Baily wrote in message <3b5c9a37...@news.lineone.net>...
>Just to annoy the world "Patch" <d.guipag...@ntlworld.com> wrote
>the following on Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:14:26 +0100:
Notice the first three words of my statement, yes I think, this is my
personal view, i know it wont happen because there is to much money behind
dogs so nothing will ever get through Parliment.
If you think my views are extreme they are nothing compared to the ideals of
RSPCA, PETA, HSUS, most other AR, vegan and vegie doctrines,, which call
for no pets so your dogs are gone fullstop. no relationship with any animals
fullstop. including guide/seeing eye dogs.
>Why is it that some always have to use minority cases to justify
>persecution of the majority?
>
>My Dawn thats the sort of thing AR, PETA RSPCA use !!!!
>--
>Dawn Baily.
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>Just to annoy the world "Patch" <d.guipag...@ntlworld.com> wrote
>the following on Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:14:26 +0100:
>
>
>>
>Why is it that some always have to use minority cases to justify
>persecution of the majority?
Just as the americans use very rare cases to justify keeping cats in
24/7.
--
Bob.
Call my cat? No, I just run the can opener.
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>>>Are you saying then that if the RSPCA was only involved in Rescue and
>>>emergency , they would kill fewer animals to save money?????
>>
>>If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
>>healthy animals to kill.
>
>So from what you have just said any rescue/emergency animal is not healthy
>so have to be killed?
I believe you are being deliberately stupid.
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>
What did you do to upset the dog?
--
Bob.
I tell you what, you should be on educational TV, you certainly make
me feel so much smarter..?
Peter
In your recent message you wrote
>>Why is it that some always have to use minority cases to justify
>>persecution of the majority?
>
>Just as the americans use very rare cases to justify keeping cats in
>24/7.
>
Bob, I suspect your keyboard is playing up again and the word "some" has
been substituted by the word "the" in the above ;-)
Regards,
--
Peter Squires
Peter
In your recent message you wrote
>Thanks ben i know it is not just me who see's dogs as becoming a menace, I
>went up to liverpool a couple of years back and saw packs of dogs mostly
>brown mongerels but with a dalmation and another different coloured dog
>amongst them.
I suspect you have gathered that the majority of folk in this list are
animal lovers and many have probably deduced that you yourself are not
keen on dogs of any kind.
Being a free country, you are welcome to discuss your concerns in here
of course and you should receive sensible answers to sensible questions.
However, I suspect I am not the only person reading your posts who has
difficulty in understanding the point you are trying to make.
As a fairly frequent visitor to Liverpool and Manchester, I can say that
I have never seen ANY packs of dogs roaming around either city. Did you
see them in the city, in forests or open spaces nearby or what? How do
you define "packs" and what were they actually doing? Did they appear
dangerous, were they playing or ripping each other to shreds?
A little more information would I am sure, help us all.
Regards,
--
Peter Squires
Ray
Bob Brenchley. wrote in message
>On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:31:57 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>>Are you saying then that if the RSPCA was only involved in Rescue and
>>>>emergency , they would kill fewer animals to save money?????
>>>
>>>If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
>>>healthy animals to kill.
>>
>>So from what you have just said any rescue/emergency animal is not healthy
>>so have to be killed?
>
If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
healthy animals to kill.
read the above your words not mine,
"they would not have healthy animals to kill."
I would like a better explanation of this, what did you mean by this
statement?? is this an admission???
>>--
>Bob.
>
>whats the matter,? huh, cat got your tounge?.
Ray
Bob Brenchley. wrote in message
I was expecting this, i did not do any thing as stated above, all i did
was get out of my fathers car to go to the toilet in a petrol station.
But this is the typical answer, from people who disbelieve that dogs will do
anything without reason, reason which is a human trait not found in dogs,
Ray
Peter wrote in message ...
>Hello Ray,
>
>In your recent message you wrote
>
>>Thanks ben i know it is not just me who see's dogs as becoming a menace,
I
>>went up to liverpool a couple of years back and saw packs of dogs mostly
>>brown mongerels but with a dalmation and another different coloured dog
>>amongst them.
>
>I suspect you have gathered that the majority of folk in this list are
>animal lovers and many have probably deduced that you yourself are not
>keen on dogs of any kind.
>
>Being a free country, you are welcome to discuss your concerns in here
>of course and you should receive sensible answers to sensible questions.
>
>However, I suspect I am not the only person reading your posts who has
>difficulty in understanding the point you are trying to make.
The point i initially was trying to make was that even though i had been
attacked, i agreed with i believe "Patch" that the RSPCA had no right to
put the dogs down without trying to rehome them first>
>As a fairly frequent visitor to Liverpool and Manchester, I can say that
>I have never seen ANY packs of dogs roaming around either city. Did you
>see them in the city,
In the city around 3 am near Toxteth, 7-8 years ago, just wndering i
suppose, having no real intrest in dogs, i do not know much about thier
social habbits
in forests or open spaces nearby or what? How do
>you define "packs"
there was around 8, i believe that more then 2 is a pack, one is one two is
a pair three is a ?
and what were they actually doing? Did they appear
>dangerous,
Thew were baout 40-50 yards away and when they looked at us walking buy yes
it scared me.
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
Last year it seems, sadly, that 600 healthy cats nationwide were put
down. SIX HUNDRED! In a country this size! Compare that to the SIX
MILLION that the USA put down each year.
The RSPCA are on target to be no-kill very soon, why not congratulate
them for the strides they have made?
--
Bob.
If you can't dazzle me with your brilliance, please don't try to
baffle me with your bullshit.
Bob Brenchley.
Not at all. A simple surf of the web brings up hundreds of sites
trying to spread the myth that cats are happy indoor-only and that
outdoors is far too dangerous.
It is like the statement "american declaw cats". Sure not all
americans do, but their country, their society, does. For that ALL
americans have to take some of the blame unless they are actively
campaigning to stop it.
--
Bob.
Anything on the ground is a cat toy. Anything not there yet, will be.
Peter
In your recent message you wrote
>The point i initially was trying to make was that even though i had been
>attacked, i agreed with i believe "Patch" that the RSPCA had no right to
>put the dogs down without trying to rehome them first>
Difficult to disagree with that, but as you have found out, we don't
live in a perfect world and isolated incidents are sadly bound to happen
I guess.
>>As a fairly frequent visitor to Liverpool and Manchester, I can say that
>>I have never seen ANY packs of dogs roaming around either city. Did you
>>see them in the city,
>
>In the city around 3 am near Toxteth, 7-8 years ago, just wndering i
>suppose, having no real intrest in dogs, i do not know much about thier
>social habbits
I shall not ask what you were doing roaming around Toxteth at that time
of the morning :-)
>there was around 8, i believe that more then 2 is a pack, one is one two is
>a pair three is a ?
Interesting. I suppose just two can exhibit "pack behaviour" so perhaps
you are right!
>Thew were baout 40-50 yards away and when they looked at us walking buy yes
>it scared me.
Now I wonder who was more scared, you or the dogs, or who was more wary
of the other? Although it is difficult if you have had a bad experience
with a dog, I find that it is best to neither feel nor display any fear
at all. The reason being, that if you DO display fear, the dog can sense
this and has to work out WHY you are afraid of it. It might decide that
you are up to no good so it goes into defensive mode and that might lead
it to "attack first and ask questions later" mode. If you can tell
yourself that you are NOT afraid of any dog, it is more likely that it
will ignore you altogether or simply wander over to say "hello". Most
(but not all of course) dogs are simply inquisitive loving animals IMHO.
Regards,
--
Peter Squires
Peter
In your recent message you wrote
>It is like the statement "american declaw cats". Sure not all
>americans do, but their country, their society, does. For that ALL
>americans have to take some of the blame unless they are actively
>campaigning to stop it.
Not wishing to get into an abortion debate, but by this reasoning,
surely Americans could take the blame for (as an example) abortion AND
for anti-abortion as (I guess) a fair percentage of their population
support one side or the other (but do not necessarily actively campaign
for one side or the other)?
One could replace abortion/anti-abortion with homosexuality/homophobia
etc, the list is probably endless.
Regards,
--
Peter Squires
Rosie Gowing
>Date: 23/07/01 15:14 GMT Daylight Time
>Message-id: <kiW67.9361$Iz3.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>
>
>
>"Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
>> Yes I think all dogs should be on DWA and have to be muzzled, all other
>> related animals have to be and i dont see the differance, wolf, dingo,
>> huntingdog hyena, DWA required by all but why not dogs? Strangely enough
>> the RSPCA are on the DWA commitee which discusss and decides what animals
>> remain on DWA and which come off. The RSPCA are trying to get most
>reptiles
>> put on DWA, (we can go into thier reasons another time) when was the last
>> time you heard of someone having thier face ripped to pieces by a garter
>> snake or a loepard gecko, or a frog??? but a child being attacked and
>> mauled by a dog 5-6 weeks ago.
>
>
>Then, by your "reasoning", *all* men should be castrated to prevent rapes
>committed by a small proportion of them.
And you disagree with that? ;-)
>
>Does that put it in perspective for you ?
>
>OK, you had a bad experience, but its usually owners, who are negligent and
>ignorant about training and socialisation, who are to blame for attacks by
>their dogs, not the dog itself.
So true.
>
>Patch
--
Rosie
Ray
Rosie Gowing wrote in message
>>Subject: Re: Are there any KILL shelters in the UK?
>>From: "Patch" d.guipag...@ntlworld.com
>>Date: 23/07/01 15:14 GMT Daylight Time
>>Message-id: <kiW67.9361$Iz3.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>
>>
>>
>>"Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> Yes I think all dogs should be on DWA and have to be muzzled, all other
>>> related animals have to be and i dont see the differance, wolf, dingo,
>>> huntingdog hyena, DWA required by all but why not dogs? Strangely
enough
>>> the RSPCA are on the DWA commitee which discusss and decides what
animals
>>> remain on DWA and which come off. The RSPCA are trying to get most
>>reptiles
>>> put on DWA, (we can go into thier reasons another time) when was the
last
>>> time you heard of someone having thier face ripped to pieces by a garter
>>> snake or a loepard gecko, or a frog??? but a child being attacked and
>>> mauled by a dog 5-6 weeks ago.
>>
>>
>>Then, by your "reasoning", *all* men should be castrated to prevent rapes
>>committed by a small proportion of them.
>
>And you disagree with that? ;-)
We are not talking about a human issue, i was not attacked by a human i was
attacked by a dog. Rape is very serious and to compare it to something like
this is well out of order,
>>
>>Does that put it in perspective for you
no , have you ever been raped or attacked by a dog
>>
>>OK, you had a bad experience, but its usually owners, who are negligent
and
>>ignorant about training and socialisation, who are to blame for attacks by
>>their dogs, not the dog itself.
>
>So true.
usual cop-out, if they were under DWA, only "good " owners would be able to
get one, thus stopping all the "bad owners" getting one. But at the end of
the day it is still the dogs that do the clawing and biting.
>>
>>Patch
>
>
>--
>Rosie
>
>
Ray
Peter wrote in message ...
Why are you bringing human feelings, issues into a disscussion about
animals??? which do not have these feelings or issues. you dont see rabbits
visiting an abortion clinic, because buggs has lost his job and they cannot
afford to feed all the babys do you ?? and you certainly will not come
accross a gay rabbit (homosexuality is only found in humans) having issues
with a homophobic gerbil.
By bringing human sentiments, feelings, issues, into a debate on animals
where they have no relevance is cheating to win, you cannot use a get out
of jail free" card when playing chess.
I personnaly cannot see the point of declawing, i have had many cats over
the years, some did rip furniture to bits but stopped when i provided them
with a scratching pole.
so why declaw??
>
>Regards,
>--
>Peter Squires
Ray
Peter wrote in message ...
>
>In your recent message you wrote
>
>>The point i initially was trying to make was that even though i had been
>>attacked, i agreed with i believe "Patch" that the RSPCA had no right
to
>>put the dogs down without trying to rehome them first>
>
>Difficult to disagree with that, but as you have found out, we don't
>live in a perfect world and isolated incidents are sadly bound to happen
>I guess.
Unfortunately neither is an isolated incedent both are getting rather
common, especialy the RSPCA killing healthy animals.
>
>>>As a fairly frequent visitor to Liverpool and Manchester, I can say that
>>>I have never seen ANY packs of dogs roaming around either city. Did you
>>>see them in the city,
>>
>>In the city around 3 am near Toxteth, 7-8 years ago, just wndering i
>>suppose, having no real intrest in dogs, i do not know much about thier
>>social habbits
>
>I shall not ask what you were doing roaming around Toxteth at that time
>of the morning :-)
Comming back from a friends farewell pissup
>
>>there was around 8, i believe that more then 2 is a pack, one is one two
is
>>a pair three is a ?
>
>Interesting. I suppose just two can exhibit "pack behaviour" so perhaps
>you are right!
not heard any different??
>
>>Thew were baout 40-50 yards away and when they looked at us walking buy
yes
>>it scared me.
>
>Now I wonder who was more scared, you or the dogs, or who was more wary
>of the other?
We walked a dam sight faster they stood there, cluck
Although it is difficult if you have had a bad experience
>with a dog, I find that it is best to neither feel nor display any fear
>at all.
Once bitten (and clawed and bleeding) rest of your life shy
The reason being, that if you DO display fear, the dog can sense
>this and has to work out WHY you are afraid of it.
I did not even see the dog comming at me, all i could think of was getting
to the toilet
It might decide that
>you are up to no good so it goes into defensive mode and that might lead
>it to "attack first and ask questions later" mode. If you can tell
>yourself that you are NOT afraid of any dog, it is more likely that it
>will ignore you altogether or simply wander over to say "hello".
I wander (quickly) away saying goodbye
Most
>(but not all of course) dogs are simply inquisitive loving animals IMHO.
I will take your word on that, as long as i am not the object of thier
intrest.
Thanks for the words, many people have tried to help, with puppies, with
really old dogs (a rescue by my flat mate of a dog waiting at the police
station for the RSPCA to pick up, when i heard that i agreed to let my flat
mate take him), my flat mate moved in with his girlfriend a couple of weeks
later and took Puff.
I still feel the same, i dont try to convince others i dont try and get all
dogs banned, i keep my views to myself ( obviously untill asked, then i wont
lie), I have never had a dog, dont want one wont get one, other people want
to won them fine just keep them away from me.
>
>Regards,
>--
>Peter Squires
Ray
Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:55:18 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>Bob Brenchley. wrote in message
>><32jolts6pqvcoesql...@4ax.com>...
>>>On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:31:57 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>Are you saying then that if the RSPCA was only involved in Rescue and
>>>>>>emergency , they would kill fewer animals to save money?????
>>>>>
>>>>>If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
>>>>>healthy animals to kill.
>>>>
>>>>So from what you have just said any rescue/emergency animal is not
healthy
>>>>so have to be killed?
>>>
>>
>>If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
>>healthy animals to kill.
>>
>>read the above your words not mine,
>>
>>"they would not have healthy animals to kill."
>>
>>I would like a better explanation of this, what did you mean by this
>>statement?? is this an admission???
>>
>
>Last year it seems, sadly, that 600 healthy cats nationwide were put
>down.
Why kill healthy animals?????The RSPCA also claim to have thousands of
Exotics turn up on thier door every year, i am down with them to rehouse any
unwanted Exotic they want me to, so far this year 1 iguana, so where are
the rest ?
Or are they Lying about the figures??
And if they lie about those, why not all the other figures????
SIX HUNDRED! In a country this size!
That is still to many, didnt the RSPCA have any money??????
Compare that to the SIX
>MILLION that the USA put down each year.
There are not that many killed in Australia each year, and cats are a pest
species over there
where do you get your figures from????
and that certainly does not justify what the RSPCA does.
>
>The RSPCA are on target to be no-kill very soon, why not congratulate
>them for the strides they have made?
Didnt we discuss this before??? moving the figures from healthy animals to
the ones that have to die for medical reasons is not progress it is murder
and fraud.
>
why not congratulate them for the strides they have made?
what for the speed they kill animals without giving them a chance to be
rehomed???
>--
>Bob.
>
>If you can't dazzle me with your brilliance, please don't try to
>baffle me with your bullshit.
Not a member of the RSPCA so very little bullshit here
You should try and learn from your own little quips.
Patch
>
> Dawn Baily wrote in message <3b5c9a37...@news.lineone.net>...
> >Just to annoy the world "Patch" <d.guipag...@ntlworld.com> wrote
> >the following on Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:14:26 +0100:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>"Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>
> >>
> >>> Yes I think
>
> Notice the first three words of my statement, yes I think, this is my
> personal view, i know it wont happen because there is to much money behind
> dogs so nothing will ever get through Parliment.
No Ray, it wont happen because it is a hysterical POV, not a valid one. I`m
sorry you had such a bad experience that you feel the way you do. Thats
genuine BTW, not sarcasm, ok ?
>
> If you think my views are extreme they are nothing compared to the ideals
of
> RSPCA, PETA, HSUS, most other AR, vegan and vegie doctrines,, which
call
> for no pets so your dogs are gone fullstop. no relationship with any
animals
> fullstop. including guide/seeing eye dogs.
I am AR [ dont have to be in an organisation to be AR, and I am not in
one ], and I`m a vegetarian. Show me anywhere that I have ever said, that
animals should not share our lives as companions ?
All I care about is that they are treated with respect, care, love and
understanding.
Please Ray, if you are going to "quote" beliefs, make sure you assign the
right "groups" to the right beliefs ?
Patch
Patch
Dogs *dont* attack for no reason. You may not be aware of what the reasons
are at the time, but they are certainly there nonetheless. You are blaming
the poodle. You *should* be blaming the poodles *owner*. You were 9 years
old. Unless you had been brought up to understand, and know how to behave
around, dogs, you can certainly be forgiven for developing a phobia instead
of realisation that the dog *will* have had a reason, and that the owner was
ultimately at fault unless the dog was in someone elses "care" at the time,
in which case, that person was at fault..
Patch
Patch
We are talking about different forms of attacks, not emotions.
Statistically, I would say there is a far higher proportion of rapes
committed than dog attacks.
Rape is very serious and to compare it to something like
> this is well out of order,
Why is it out of order ?
>
> >>
> >>Does that put it in perspective for you
>
> no , have you ever been raped or attacked by a dog
Yup.
>
> >>
> >>OK, you had a bad experience, but its usually owners, who are negligent
> and
> >>ignorant about training and socialisation, who are to blame for attacks
by
> >>their dogs, not the dog itself.
> >
> >So true.
>
> usual cop-out, if they were under DWA, only "good " owners would be able
to
> get one, thus stopping all the "bad owners" getting one. But at the end
of
> the day it is still the dogs that do the clawing and biting.
Ray, please, see a counsellor. This [ understandable ] phobia is really
problematic for you. I do mean that with all sincerity - I have phobias, so
I do know how they distort views.
Patch
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>
>Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>>On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:55:18 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Bob Brenchley. wrote in message
>>><32jolts6pqvcoesql...@4ax.com>...
>>>>On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:31:57 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>Are you saying then that if the RSPCA was only involved in Rescue and
>>>>>>>emergency , they would kill fewer animals to save money?????
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
>>>>>>healthy animals to kill.
>>>>>
>>>>>So from what you have just said any rescue/emergency animal is not
>healthy
>>>>>so have to be killed?
>>>>
>>>
>>>If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
>>>healthy animals to kill.
>>>
>>>read the above your words not mine,
>>>
>>>"they would not have healthy animals to kill."
>>>
>>>I would like a better explanation of this, what did you mean by this
>>>statement?? is this an admission???
>>>
>
>>
>>Last year it seems, sadly, that 600 healthy cats nationwide were put
>>down.
>
>Why kill healthy animals?????
Sadly they do not give case details.
>The RSPCA also claim to have thousands of
>Exotics turn up on thier door every year, i am down with them to rehouse any
>unwanted Exotic they want me to, so far this year 1 iguana, so where are
>the rest ?
How the hell do I know.
>
>Or are they Lying about the figures??
I doubt it, why would they do that?
>
>And if they lie about those, why not all the other figures????
>
>SIX HUNDRED! In a country this size!
>
>That is still to many, didnt the RSPCA have any money??????
There is a lot of difference between having money and being able to
spend it when you want.
>
>Compare that to the SIX
>>MILLION that the USA put down each year.
>
>There are not that many killed in Australia each year, and cats are a pest
>species over there
What has Australia got to do with it? And they are only a pest in very
small areas.
>
>where do you get your figures from????
Alt.cats and a few other places. The figure is around 13 million cats
and dogs a year but I think that is a few years old.
>
>and that certainly does not justify what the RSPCA does.
>>
>>The RSPCA are on target to be no-kill very soon, why not congratulate
>>them for the strides they have made?
>
>Didnt we discuss this before??? moving the figures from healthy animals to
>the ones that have to die for medical reasons is not progress it is murder
>and fraud.
Your evidence for thins happening is?
>>
>
>why not congratulate them for the strides they have made?
>
>what for the speed they kill animals without giving them a chance to be
>rehomed???
I do not believe that happens. I certainly know our local CPL and NCDL
work with the RSPCA to do everything possible to make sure that is not
necessary.
>
>>--
>>Bob.
>>
>>If you can't dazzle me with your brilliance, please don't try to
>>baffle me with your bullshit.
>
>Not a member of the RSPCA so very little bullshit here
>
>You should try and learn from your own little quips.
I'm able to make them because I learnt years ago to think BEFORE
opening my mouth.
--
Bob.
You need to find a quiet corner and have a word with yourself.
Alley Cat
>
> homosexuality is only found in humans
This is not true.
Bruce Bagemihl is a biologist and researcher who taught linguistics and
cognitive science at the University of British Columbia. He has written
extensively on language, biology, gender and sexuality.
In his book "Biological Exuberance - Animal Homosexuality and Natural
Diversity", (published May 1999 ISBN 1 86197 182 6) he documents
homosexual behaviour, intersexuality and transvestism in over 450
species of animal. Drawing upon extensive zoological research he
discusses the ways animals are sexually active and includes
photographs. This book is widely accepted as the definitive study of
animal homosexuality.
In 1987 WJ Tennent published a paper called "A Note on the Apparent
Lowering of Moral Standards in the Lepidoptera", which was a study of
homosexuality among Mazarine Blue butterflies in Morocco.
The first written notes on emus described homosexual activity, which was
observed well before heterosexual activity in that species.
In male sheep, a lack of docking sites in the brain for a specific
chemical messenger leads to homosexual tendencies. This finding
strengthens the idea that biological factors underlie behavior, says
Anne Perkins, an animal behaviorist at Carroll College in Helena,
Mont......
----- SCIENCE NEWS, VOL. 145 MARCH 5, 1994.
There have been many published studies on homosexuality in non-human
animals.
Alley Cat
Peter
In your recent message you wrote
>There have been many published studies on homosexuality in non-human
>animals.
I hope Barrymore doesn't read this ng!
--
Peter Squires
Ray
Patch wrote in message ...
>Dogs *dont* attack for no reason. You may not be aware of what the reasons
>are at the time, but they are certainly there nonetheless. You are blaming
>the poodle. You *should* be blaming the poodles *owner*
Why, it was not the owner who attacked me, if i was attacked by a human do
i blame his wife? his parents?? who
. You were 9 years
>old. Unless you had been brought up to understand, and know how to behave
>around, dogs, you can certainly be forgiven for developing a phobia instead
>of realisation that the dog *will* have had a reason, and that the owner
was
>ultimately at fault unless the dog was in someone elses "care" at the time,
>in which case, that person was at fault..
I can see that you are trying to put your point across to me, and i thank
you, for your concern in other mails. I have lived with this for nearly 30
years, if i see a dog i will cross the street, i dont run the risk of being
biten, dog dosn't run the risk of being put down, owner does not get sued,
everybody is happy.
There have been many people attacked by dogs, dogs were bred for many
things, some were for hunting, fighting, others as guard dogs, various
breeds were purified by inbreeding, so specific characteristics would be
better developed, in the examples mentioned fierceness and agression were
the characters required.
Why do we still need to breed these varieties, if it is not for those same
characteristics, now dogs are being crossed with wolfs why???? because they
work together as a pack????they are better companions??? or for the wolf
aggression???
I believe these hybrids are readily avaliable to the public, if dogs were
governed by the DWA these hybrids would not get anywhere near children.
there were so many attacks a couple of years back that the government had to
act, this made people scared for their dogs and kept them inside.
Dogs are closely related top wolves where they origionally came from ( ok
from wolves and other forms of WILD dog), they are born with the ability to
attack, maim and kill.
>Patch
>
>
>
Ray
Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>>>>If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
>>>>healthy animals to kill.
still have not explained "they would not have healthy animals to kill."
is this a confesion, that they kill healthy animals???
>>>Last year it seems, sadly, that 600 healthy cats nationwide were put
>>>down.
>>
>>Why kill healthy animals?????
>
>Sadly they do not give case details.
>
>>The RSPCA also claim to have thousands of
>>Exotics turn up on thier door every year, i am down with them to rehouse
any
>>unwanted Exotic they want me to, so far this year 1 iguana, so where are
>>the rest ?
>
>How the hell do I know.
>>
>>Or are they Lying about the figures??
>
>I doubt it, why would they do that?
so if they are not lying about the thousands of exotics, and i know of no
exotic rescue / keeper who is over run with RSPCA animals, then they must be
killing them???
even though there are people willing to take them they kill them,
So they are either lying about there figures, or they are willingly killing
healthy animals,
And you support these people?
>
>>And if they lie about those, why not all the other figures????
>>
>>SIX HUNDRED! In a country this size!
So what is a good number of healthy animals to kill??
>>
>>That is still to many, didnt the RSPCA have any money??????
>
>There is a lot of difference between having money and being able to
>spend it when you want.
Yes like giving it to the sanctuarys to feed the animals the RSPCA dump on
them
>>
>>Compare that to the SIX
>>>MILLION that the USA put down each year.
>>
>>There are not that many killed in Australia each year, and cats are a pest
>>species over there
>
>What has Australia got to do with it? And they are only a pest in very
>small areas.
>>
>>where do you get your figures from????
>
>Alt.cats and a few other places. The figure is around 13 million cats
>and dogs a year but I think that is a few years old.
rubbish, you are not showing any data if you killed that many cats per year
in a very short period of time there would be no cats left,
>>
>>and that certainly does not justify what the RSPCA does.
>>>
>>>The RSPCA are on target to be no-kill very soon, why not congratulate
>>>them for the strides they have made?
>>
>>Didnt we discuss this before??? moving the figures from healthy animals
to
>>the ones that have to die for medical reasons is not progress it is murder
>>and fraud.
>
>Your evidence for thins happening is?
The RSPCA lie about there other figures so why not these????
>>>
>>
>>why not congratulate them for the strides they have made?
>>
>>what for the speed they kill animals without giving them a chance to be
>>rehomed???
>
>I do not believe that happens.
Last Friday Daily Star, took money left in will, killed dog left in there
care, your denial does not make the facts dissapear
I certainly know our local CPL and NCDL
yes these are the real people who care for them
>work with the RSPCA to do everything possible to make sure that is not
>necessary.
Because they know you will kill them to save some money
>>
>>>--
>>>Bob.
>>>
>>>If you can't dazzle me with your brilliance, please don't try to
>>>baffle me with your bullshit.
>>
>>Not a member of the RSPCA so very little bullshit here
>>
>I'm able to make them
A lie, some of the quips you have posted are actually lines from films, and
the one above has been kicking around for years, and is also from a film i
believe, so if you can lie about your little quips what else are you lying
about?? Your RSPCA masters have trained you well
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>
>Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>
>>>>>If they were only involved with rescue/emergency they would not have
>>>>>healthy animals to kill.
>
>still have not explained "they would not have healthy animals to kill."
>
>is this a confesion, that they kill healthy animals???
>
>>>>Last year it seems, sadly, that 600 healthy cats nationwide were put
>>>>down.
>>>
>>>Why kill healthy animals?????
>>
>>Sadly they do not give case details.
>>
>>>The RSPCA also claim to have thousands of
>>>Exotics turn up on thier door every year, i am down with them to rehouse
>any
>>>unwanted Exotic they want me to, so far this year 1 iguana, so where are
>>>the rest ?
>>
>>How the hell do I know.
>>>
>>>Or are they Lying about the figures??
>>
>>I doubt it, why would they do that?
>
>so if they are not lying about the thousands of exotics, and i know of no
>exotic rescue / keeper who is over run with RSPCA animals, then they must be
>killing them???
Your evidence for that?
>
>even though there are people willing to take them they kill them,
You know this for a fact?
>
>So they are either lying about there figures, or they are willingly killing
>healthy animals,
For all we know there may be other options you have not considered.
>
>And you support these people?
In general, yes. Nobody claims they are perfect, but they are better
than nothing, certainly better than the American "pound" system.
>>
>>>And if they lie about those, why not all the other figures????
>>>
>>>SIX HUNDRED! In a country this size!
>
>So what is a good number of healthy animals to kill??
ZERO, but that is an impossible dream.
>
>>>
>>>That is still to many, didnt the RSPCA have any money??????
>>
>>There is a lot of difference between having money and being able to
>>spend it when you want.
>
>Yes like giving it to the sanctuarys to feed the animals the RSPCA dump on
>them
Which they do, and of course help with many of the sick ones.
>>>
>>>Compare that to the SIX
>>>>MILLION that the USA put down each year.
>>>
>>>There are not that many killed in Australia each year, and cats are a pest
>>>species over there
>>
>>What has Australia got to do with it? And they are only a pest in very
>>small areas.
>>>
>>>where do you get your figures from????
>>
>>Alt.cats and a few other places. The figure is around 13 million cats
>>and dogs a year but I think that is a few years old.
>
>rubbish, you are not showing any data if you killed that many cats per year
>in a very short period of time there would be no cats left,
You obviously have no idea how large the cat population of the USA is.
>
>>>
>>>and that certainly does not justify what the RSPCA does.
>>>>
>>>>The RSPCA are on target to be no-kill very soon, why not congratulate
>>>>them for the strides they have made?
>>>
>>>Didnt we discuss this before??? moving the figures from healthy animals
>to
>>>the ones that have to die for medical reasons is not progress it is murder
>>>and fraud.
>>
>>Your evidence for thins happening is?
>
>The RSPCA lie about there other figures so why not these????
I've seen no evidence as yet that the RSPCA do lie.
>>>>
>>>
>>>why not congratulate them for the strides they have made?
>>>
>>>what for the speed they kill animals without giving them a chance to be
>>>rehomed???
>>
>>I do not believe that happens.
>
>Last Friday Daily Star, took money left in will, killed dog left in there
>care, your denial does not make the facts dissapear
I would like to see the facts, not the story in an excuse for a paper.
>
>
>I certainly know our local CPL and NCDL
>
>yes these are the real people who care for them
>
>
>>work with the RSPCA to do everything possible to make sure that is not
>>necessary.
>
>
>Because they know you will kill them to save some money
Your evidence for this claim?
>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Bob.
>>>>
>>>>If you can't dazzle me with your brilliance, please don't try to
>>>>baffle me with your bullshit.
>>>
>>>Not a member of the RSPCA so very little bullshit here
>>>
>>I'm able to make them
>
>A lie, some of the quips you have posted are actually lines from films, and
>the one above has been kicking around for years, and is also from a film i
>believe, so if you can lie about your little quips what else are you lying
>about?? Your RSPCA masters have trained you well
Sometimes the stupidity of people really does surprise me.
Alley Cat
He can read?
Alley Cat
Ray
Well i thought it was pretty bloody obvious, if all these Thousands of
Exotics are being given to people who run sanctuarys for exotic animals,
there would be a huge surplus of animals, and everyone would be bogged down
with them. But we are not, so where are all the thousands of animals????
Either the RSPCA are lying about the figure or they are killing the animals,
which is pretty common knowledge
But what do you careless they have to spend on animals the more they can
spend on staff, its not about the animals anyway
>
>>
>>even though there are people willing to take them they kill them,
>
>You know this for a fact?
Yep, well for a start they have my number, and only one call this year?????
>
>>
>>So they are either lying about there figures, or they are willingly
killing
>>healthy animals,
>
>For all we know there may be other options you have not considered.
OH yes like what????
>>
>>And you support these people?
>
>In general, yes. Nobody claims they are perfect, but they are better
>than nothing, certainly better than the American "pound" system.
>>>
>>>>And if they lie about those, why not all the other figures????
>>>>
>>>>SIX HUNDRED! In a country this size!
>>
>>So what is a good number of healthy animals to kill??
>
>ZERO, but that is an impossible dream.
also the same dream as the amount of animals the RSPCA wants in captivity,
shame you dont advertise that alot more
>>
>>>>
>>>>That is still to many, didnt the RSPCA have any money??????
>>>
>>>There is a lot of difference between having money and being able to
>>>spend it when you want.
>>
>>Yes like giving it to the sanctuarys to feed the animals the RSPCA dump on
>>them
>
>Which they do, and of course help with many of the sick ones.
so why do sanctuary owners and vets all say the RSPCA could do alot more????
I took a stray cat to a vet 18 months back, the vet said it would cost
around £600 to fix the cat, (one eye was infected a real, mess, sort of
disease ridden alley cat typicly seen) i told them i did not have that sort
of money but if the RSPCA paid fopr it i would house the cat, I was told "
Its hard enough to get them to pay for a snip naver mind an operation" the
cat was killed by the vet the next day.
Have you got a bad memory??/, the start of this repply??? exotics, they lie
about those figures
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>why not congratulate them for the strides they have made?
>>>>
>>>>what for the speed they kill animals without giving them a chance to be
>>>>rehomed???
>>>
>>>I do not believe that happens.
>>
>>Last Friday Daily Star, took money left in will, killed dog left in there
>>care, your denial does not make the facts dissapear
>
>I would like to see the facts, not the story in an excuse for a paper.
I would like to see the animals have a chance to live, not die in an excuse
for a charity like the RSPCA
>>
>>
>>I certainly know our local CPL and NCDL
>>
>>yes these are the real people who care for them
>>
>>
>>>work with the RSPCA to do everything possible to make sure that is not
>>>necessary.
>>
>>
>>Because they know you will kill them to save some money
>
>Your evidence for this claim?
Why else did the RSPCA kill 600 healthy cats??????? your figures not mine
>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>Bob.
>>>>>
>>>>>If you can't dazzle me with your brilliance, please don't try to
>>>>>baffle me with your bullshit.
>>>>
>>>>Not a member of the RSPCA so very little bullshit here
>>>>
>>>I'm able to make them
>>
>>A lie, some of the quips you have posted are actually lines from films,
and
>>the one above has been kicking around for years, and is also from a film i
>>believe, so if you can lie about your little quips what else are you lying
>>about?? Your RSPCA masters have trained you well
>
>Sometimes the stupidity of people really does surprise me.
And me, you accuse others of being stupid and you cannot even follow a
thread in a posting.
Go on, run of and kill some animals
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>
>Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>>On Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:35:18 +0100, "Ray" <angela...@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>so if they are not lying about the thousands of exotics, and i know of no
>>>exotic rescue / keeper who is over run with RSPCA animals, then they must
>be
>>>killing them???
>>
>>Your evidence for that?
>
>Well i thought it was pretty bloody obvious, if all these Thousands of
>Exotics are being given to people who run sanctuarys for exotic animals,
>there would be a huge surplus of animals, and everyone would be bogged down
>with them.
Would they? Thousands divided by hundreds doesn't equal many - how
many collectors are there?
> But we are not, so where are all the thousands of animals????
Found homes?
>
>Either the RSPCA are lying about the figure or they are killing the animals,
>which is pretty common knowledge
I doubt they would need to kill them if there are so many people like
you - why would they want to?
>
>But what do you careless they have to spend on animals the more they can
>spend on staff, its not about the animals anyway
You have to have staff to deal with animals.
>>
>>>
>>>even though there are people willing to take them they kill them,
>>
>>You know this for a fact?
>
>Yep, well for a start they have my number, and only one call this year?????
Mmmm. They also have my number. Three calls this year. Nothing with
exotics, I deal with puddytats.
>
>>
>>>
>>>So they are either lying about there figures, or they are willingly
>killing
>>>healthy animals,
>>
>>For all we know there may be other options you have not considered.
>
>OH yes like what????
I know a lot of exotics go to zoos.
>>>
>>>So what is a good number of healthy animals to kill??
>>
>>ZERO, but that is an impossible dream.
>
>also the same dream as the amount of animals the RSPCA wants in captivity,
>shame you dont advertise that alot more
The RSPCA have nothing against animals in captivity.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>That is still to many, didnt the RSPCA have any money??????
>>>>
>>>>There is a lot of difference between having money and being able to
>>>>spend it when you want.
>>>
>>>Yes like giving it to the sanctuarys to feed the animals the RSPCA dump on
>>>them
>>
>>Which they do, and of course help with many of the sick ones.
>
>so why do sanctuary owners and vets all say the RSPCA could do alot more????
>I took a stray cat to a vet 18 months back, the vet said it would cost
>around £600 to fix the cat, (one eye was infected a real, mess, sort of
>disease ridden alley cat typicly seen) i told them i did not have that sort
>of money but if the RSPCA paid fopr it i would house the cat, I was told "
>Its hard enough to get them to pay for a snip naver mind an operation" the
>cat was killed by the vet the next day.
I take cats (and other animals) into the vets all the time for people
and the RSPCA often pick up part or all of the tab.
>
>
>>
>>I would like to see the facts, not the story in an excuse for a paper.
>
>
>I would like to see the animals have a chance to live, not die in an excuse
>for a charity like the RSPCA
I say again, I would like to see the facts, not the story in an excuse
for a paper.
>>>
>>>Because they know you will kill them to save some money
>>
>>Your evidence for this claim?
>
>Why else did the RSPCA kill 600 healthy cats??????? your figures not mine
Most likely because at the time there was not sufficient resources to
deal with them.
>
>
>>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>Bob.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If you can't dazzle me with your brilliance, please don't try to
>>>>>>baffle me with your bullshit.
>>>>>
>>>>>Not a member of the RSPCA so very little bullshit here
>>>>>
>>>>I'm able to make them
>>>
>>>A lie, some of the quips you have posted are actually lines from films,
>and
>>>the one above has been kicking around for years, and is also from a film i
>>>believe, so if you can lie about your little quips what else are you lying
>>>about?? Your RSPCA masters have trained you well
>>
>>Sometimes the stupidity of people really does surprise me.
>
>
>And me, you accuse others of being stupid and you cannot even follow a
>thread in a posting.
It was a comment added to the end of a reply.
>
>Go on, run of and kill some animals
I would rather try to save them.
--
Bob.
If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?
Ray
Bob Brenchley. wrote in message ...
>>Well i thought it was pretty bloody obvious, if all these Thousands of
>>Exotics are being given to people who run sanctuarys for exotic animals,
>>there would be a huge surplus of animals, and everyone would be bogged
down
>>with them.
>
>Would they? Thousands divided by hundreds doesn't equal many - how
>many collectors are there?
Hundreds, and i know quite a few, with the appearance of caps, (whom the
RSPCA support), and the RSPCA trying to put exotics onto DWA, ecotic
keepers are passing information about AR freely amongst each other. So far
there have been very few calls from the RSPCA to exotic keepers to home
unwanted animals.
>
>> But we are not, so where are all the thousands of animals????
>
>Found homes?
I know cases where animals were oicked up by RSPCA inspectors and killed
before i could get to them, and a case where an old ladys TORTOISE, that she
had for around 25 years was picked up by the RSPCA one morning and when her
family rang in the afternoon they were told (eventually) they had picked up
a TERRAPIN AND DESTROYED IT. I have a pond in my garden just for
terrapins,
No body was avaliable for inspection, but what an exspensive animal to "go
astray" lost the body of the only terrapin they KILLED that day
Rubbish, 90% of the calls i had from the RSPCA in the past few years have
been to pick up "adders" (slow worms and 1 grass snake) from peoples
gardens, and "giant spiders" ( British spiders people have not seen before)
of the other 10% 1 must have picked up and re housed 20 animals if that, so
where are the thousands???
RSPCA lies and scaremongering to raise cash
>>
>>Either the RSPCA are lying about the figure or they are killing the
animals,
>>which is pretty common knowledge
>
>I doubt they would need to kill them if there are so many people like
>you - why would they want to?
>>
>>But what do you careless they have to spend on animals the more they can
>>spend on staff, its not about the animals anyway
>
>You have to have staff to deal with animals.
So you kill them to save money in staffing?????
>>>
>>>>
>>>>even though there are people willing to take them they kill them,
>>>
>>>You know this for a fact?
see above
>>
>>Yep, well for a start they have my number, and only one call this
year?????
>
>Mmmm. They also have my number. Three calls this year. Nothing with
>exotics, I deal with puddytats.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>So they are either lying about there figures, or they are willingly
>>killing
>>>>healthy animals,
>>>
>>>For all we know there may be other options you have not considered.
>>
>>OH yes like what????
>
>I know a lot of exotics go to zoos.
ZOO's dont want the "pet" reptiles, they are not that good for displaying,
as most people have seen them in pet shops, have very little value , (on of
the succsesses of captive breeding it devalues an animal so wild collecting
is worthless), and for the amount of food and space required they can keep
something much rarer and in need of attention.
>
>>>>
>>>>So what is a good number of healthy animals to kill??
>>>
>>>ZERO, but that is an impossible dream.
>>
>>also the same dream as the amount of animals the RSPCA wants in captivity,
>>shame you dont advertise that alot more
>
>The RSPCA have nothing against animals in captivity.
It is in the RSPCA's own doctrine they are against any animal in captivity,
but yet they con pet keepers out of money as they believe they money goes to
save animals.
You published the kill figure of 600 healthy cats killed, you said you
also have to pay staff, so why kill the 600 healthy cats if not to save
money????
>>
>>Why else did the RSPCA kill 600 healthy cats??????? your figures not mine
>
>Most likely because at the time there was not sufficient resources to
>deal with them.
So someone decided they were not going to spend any money to keep them
yes or no????
Rosemary Rodd
Ray wrote:
> Any shelter with the letters RSPCA above the door is a start.
>
> I have been thrown into the anti AR thing , the only shelters i can find
> that are worth trusting (there may be others out there) are PDSA and Blue
> Cross.
>
Which is surprising since the PDSA doesn't have ANY shelters (it is an
excellent veterinary charity).
Mark Etheridge
wrote:
Stop the funding for RSPCA and give it to PDSA then, they will soon
get their shelters.
Rosemary Rodd
Mark Etheridge wrote:
PDSA = People's Dispensary for Sick Animals.