TOPPER 1,809 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 they should change there name to dick turpin, there just a robbing bunch of crunt s , i think its high time they lost that royal assent and got treated just like any other charity, if anybody else had destroyed those badger setts etc there would be an outcry but these tossers are allowed to get away with it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted April 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 A big bit of my local permission has just been sold for development and the secretary of state has given approval to get on with the building, however the place holds at least 2 active badger setts and more get opened up every year by the young boars leaving a big old main sett a 1/4 of a mile away.......now not many people know about these setts and I don't think it was brought up in the petition to stop the building. Does anyone know the law where this is concerned, are builders allowed to interfere with these setts......we are talking about a proposed 650 house estate? .. i think permission can be granted to relocate the setts ,from who im not sure maybe defra it has been done on big developments before and ££££££££££££££ talk Spot on. It always seems that big developers can get it done no matter how many badgers are on the land, but if you're someone who has got a small bit of land somewhere with a single set that's stopping you doing a bit for yourself you're told to forget it, no chance.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
whippet 99 2,613 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 fook me look at everyone on here , whats it too wet for a dig this morning lol rspca are antis they aint got no morals or respect for anything, there a charity what feeds off honest folk Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nik_B 3,790 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Didn't they sue a family a couple of years ago because they felt they didn't get enough from the will? Greedy scum Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted April 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Didn't they sue a family a couple of years ago because they felt they didn't get enough from the will? Greedy scum Yeah, they lost a case over a contested will and then appealed the decision and lost that too. They'd already been left a load of money from the same person, they went back to court for the farm iirc.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted April 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Didn't they sue a family a couple of years ago because they felt they didn't get enough from the will? Greedy scum Yeah, they lost a case over a contested will and then appealed the decision and lost that too. They'd already been left a load of money from the same person, they went back to court for the farm iirc.. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-11890872 Good news is it cost them £1.5 million in legal fees due to them having the gall to appeal the first decision. http://www.buckles-law.co.uk/site/library/privateclient/RSPCA_Comes_back_for_more.html Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gnasher16 30,062 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Pretty much sums up the rspca...............and everything they stand for ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Simoman 110 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Money is the driving force, not animal welfare......... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Catcher 1 639 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 In 1998 a big comglomerate tryed to buy a large part of or local glen.Every shooter and dogymen were up in arms.But it took a few nature lovers to beat them.There claim was the land was part of the green belt and could not be touchted.It was a nature habitat for roe deer,badgers,brown hare. A lot of rare birds.And brown trout in the river.So we suported them.We went to all the meetings not thinking we could ever win.The big wigs allways came with a police escourt.We would not budge.So they offered us £1.000.000.For the local community.In the end we found out they had been drilling and testing the ground for two years without telling the local residents.High court went in our favour.Never seen more than 25 people at any meeting and we won hands down. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
paulus 26 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 at the end of the day most charities are a buisness and as such are ruled by the bottom line of the ballance sheet. sad but true Quote Link to post Share on other sites
riohog 5,701 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 charities is a posh word for ..tax avoidence Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Catcher 1 639 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 The top dogs in the rspca earn about £100.000 a year.Jo public are mugs.Only about 15 percent of your money gets to the animals that need it.The rest is creamed of by the big wigs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Seeker 3,048 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 "for just two pounds per month" blah blah blah goes the advert with a cute puppy being held in front of the camera, thing is they never seem to let joe public know how many hundreds of dogs they put down each year do they? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gnasher16 30,062 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 For me the rspca backing the dangerous dogs act will go down as the single most treachourous act a man could put on an animal.....................and even if for no other reason than that id like every man/woman who wears that uniform and allows their name to be associated with that disgusting organisation suffer the same genocide they put an entire breed of dogs through. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GrCh 856 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 For me the rspca backing the dangerous dogs act will go down as the single most treachourous act a man could put on an animal.....................and even if for no other reason than that id like every man/woman who wears that uniform and allows their name to be associated with that disgusting organisation suffer the same genocide they put an entire breed of dogs through. 100% agree. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.