New website

At least some of the "policy changes" the site seems to want would potentially be extremely damaging to animal welfare. Take a look at http://animals-have-rights.co.uk/page_1253655383355.html for example. They want the RSPCA to change from a moderate animal welfare stance to a hardline AND POINTLESS position that no government would realistically ever contemplate. I would rather belong to an organisation that is actually trying to help animals than one that just sits about saying, "isn´t it dreadful?"

Ed, as far as I can see, the site is there to make one think about animal welfare and to me, this is a very good thing. If you have designed a site for this reason, then you have to include as many different areas as possible so that people can see the true picture. I think in all fairness, the RSPCA should be highlighted as this is happening in this particular Country - and it shouldn´t be, the people we trust to defend the welfare of animals are letting them down and this MUST be changed. I have no political agenda here, I work towards and care very much about the welfare of animals are if I see power being abused in this area, then I want to know about it. I personally do not need to check out the links, as I said previously I work for an organisation (again I would stress - not an animal rights group) which can supply as much proof as is needed, so to me, this needs to be discussed. The site mentioned by Sue has done exactly what it should do, provoke discussion, without that we cannot make advances in the animal welfare area.

Noone is asking you or anyone to jump on the bandwagon, the site is there purely as an information site for people to make their own minds up based on the factual evidence which is there for all to see.
Yes I do know who is behind the site and I can assure you that that person is not an activist in any shape or form, they are just confirmed animal lovers like you and I who just want to see animals get a fair deal and to bring about changes in policies in organisations such as the RSPCA to ensure they do get a fair deal.
I dont understand how you associate the RSPCA with all the pictures that are in the gallery, some are RSPCA related, others clearly state otherwise and as I stated in a previous post, the RSPCA are not held accountable for cruelty outside the UK, so are you saying what is stated about the RSPCA on that site, which is fact based and 110% provable, is not true?

Alex - the reason I used the word mischief is because the site in question has two very different aims.
1. To highlight animal abuse all over the world with graphic an disturbing images.
2. To be critical of the RSPCA.

The mischief is to associate the two and to make someone that criticises this site to be open to an accusation of not being pro animal welfare.

If you want to have a site that is critical of the RSPCA you can do so - there already are some out there. And by the same token there are many sites that are extremely animal rights with many horrible pictures. We have featured some of the pictures on stories on PetStreet like the dog deliberately burnt in France. (But the story behind the photo was not told).

Like every one on PetStreet i care very much about animal welfare issues but that does not mean i will jump on any bandwagon going because someone has a political agenda.

Sue - Can you tell us who is behind this site? You obviously know them so can you tell us more please ands why they dont say on the website?

I am a new on here but feel I would like to comment on this posting. I agree that the site mentioned below is hard-hitting, it has to be, there is no room for complacency in regard to animal welfare and I think the public has a right to know exactly what is going on in respect of this. It is now time that people who commit offences of these type, should face the fullest penalties our judicial system can offer, whether this applies to a member of the general public, or an organisation.

As you have mentioned the RSPCA, Editor, I feel that I must also comment on this. I am a Dog Co-ordinator for a rescue organisation and I have proof of neglect by the above society. It simply is no good prosecuting the people responsible for cruelty after the event, when the RSPCA have been told (in the particular case I have knowledge of) many times that cruelty is being committed and then to do absoluItely nothing to prevent it. This is not the only case, there are many, many more. No one wishes to close down the RSPCA, I personally feel that there should be a higher authority to which they are responsible and an Omnbudsman to look into complaints lodged against them. I do not know of any other organisation which is a law unto itself.

In my opinion it is not ´mischief´ to point out the severe failings of this organisation, in doing so one would hope that it may actually spur them on to correcting those failings which have been pointed out.

I am also NOT an animal rights fanatic, but I will happily admit to being an animal welfare fanatic and I am very proud to class myself as such.

I have subsequently looked at the site and though there have been a few denials in response to my comments they still say "The aim is to educate people about animals & animal rights." Anyway the internet is a democracy and they can say what they want on their site. i just wanted to make my views known as i did 3 posts below - and thats exactly what i think. I also think the idea of associating the RSPCA with these horrible pictures is pure mischief.

I will just add if you care to read the site it is trying to promote a change in RSPCA policies NOT to remove them altogether, as stated previously the front page has now been changed to make this clearer.

I have spoken at length to the person who created this site and they have now changed the wording on the front page.
The site is about animal welfare and most definitely NOT about animal rights ie liberation fanatical etc. Unfortunately the RSPCA do not listen to the public, as I stated in an earlier post, this country needs the RSPCA but we need them to look after all animals not just to turn up when there is a TV crew around, not just to captive bolt kill dogs with just a quick 5 minute assessment and most of all to support their local branches with funding, the people in the local branches are trying their hardest so surely all the money that went into building the flash new offices at Horsham, the brand new cars and the grossly overpaid executives would be far better spent building new kennels, creating new inspectors so that EVERY animal who needs their help will get it properly, I was always brought up to believe that if my pets ever needed help I could go to the RSPCA, that was probably true then but that is not the case now , sadly it is money that drives them now, not the love of animals.
Also if the site is read it will be explained that the RSPCA are not being held responsible for cruelty abroad, that is ridiculous, how could they be? but it is to show that all over the world animals are treated badly, the human race domesticated the dog so we need to look after and love them, this site is to try to make people aware not fanatics.

i love my monty .. i v lost the will 2 live with this site not sure what this is about

The are so many issues here:-
1. is the site about animal welfare (which we support 100%) or animal rights (which I have a problem with as i explain below).

2. Sue - i do agree that all animals in human care have rights - but Animal Rights is also a political movement and doctrine.

3. The site has graphic images from all over the world of animal suffering. Of course that sickens me.

4. But its key thrust is anti-RSPCA. Why is it muddying the water and and confusing two totally separate issues. Are they trying to associate the RSPCA with those terrible pictures?

5. Sue - You are a sincere person and an animal lover -i can see that. But this site is a piece of manipulative mischief.

6. I know the RSPCA are not perfect - but they do not deserve this sort of attack. This site does not help solve problems -it drives people into corners, polarises viewpoints and is designed to cause problems rather than solve them.