RSPCA INDEPENDENT REVIEW

 

The RSPCA Trustees have, under pressure from various sources, commissioned an independent review of the charity's prosecution activities.

 

This reviewer is requesting submissions from any persons concerned with the charity's policy.

 

 

This is the British Bird Council submission on behalf of our members:

 

 

Dear Sirs 

 

I am writing on behalf of members of The British Bird Council (BBC). The council was formed in 1972 to represent those individuals and affiliated societies whose members pursue the legitimate hobby of keeping,
breeding and exhibiting captive bred British and European native bird species.

 

As an organisation we do not condone any illegal activities associated with aviculture particularly with regard to the 1981 Wildlife and Countryside Act. Our objectives have always been to educate in the pursuit of aviculture.

  

In the past we had regular contact with the RSPCA, however since the time when the RSPCA announced they were totally opposed to the captive keeping and breeding of British birds, and they become increasingly concerned with bringing private prosecutions against aviculturists, the relationship has been strained and almost non-existent. 

  

The BBC along with the International Ornithological Association (IOA) issue closed metal rings to aviculturists which are fitted to the legs of recently hatched birds to show they have been bred in captivity.
This is in accordance with the legislation contained in the 1981 Act and agreed with DEFRA. Each ring is individually marked and records are kept as to who the rings were issued together with their address, this information is kept within our office on computer hardware.

  

In circumstances where the Police are investigating wildlife crime they contact the BBC to obtain information related to specific ring numbers from birds they have examined or seized. Upon a written request the BBC
have always fully cooperated and passed this information over.

 

For some years now it is apparent that the Police are acting on information supplied by the RSPCA who persuade the Police to obtain warrants to enter premises of aviculturists who they (RSPCA) suspect of committing wildlife crimes, the RSPCA accompany the Police during these raids. Any information that the Police obtain from the BBC regarding ring numbers, names and addresses are immediately shared with the RSPCA who then make their own further investigations, acting like police when they visit properties, they even
at times issue cautions although these of course have no legal standing but nonetheless intimidate those aviculturists who are unaware that the RSPCA have no legal standing whatsoever.

  

I cannot over emphasise this last point which is that employees of the RSPCA do not have any special legal powers, they are no different to the average man in the street i.e. merely members of the public.
They dress in uniforms similar to Police and call themselves Inspector or Chief Inspector but they are, all the same, just an ordinary member of the public.

  

I cannot think of any other circumstance in which a member of the public i.e. RSPCA employee, who would be given confidential and privileged information and accompany the Police on dawn raids thereby enabling them to
pursue private prosecutions and to further their own political agenda, this is outrageous.

  

On these raids the number of personnel including employees of the RSPCA is at times unbelievable and cannot be justified for this level of wildlife crime. In financial terms the expenditure on this charity is disproportionate and unjustified for an organisation set up for the interests of animal protection and goes beyond the remit of its founding principles and the interests of its donors in pursuit of its top personnel’s own political agenda,
which in the case of the BBC is to stop the legitimate keeping of British birds in captivity for its own ideology even though there is no cruelty involved.

  

Due to its financial position the RSPCA is able to throw disproportionate resources into intimidating and persecuting law abiding citizens who, because of a quirk in natural justice, have the reverse burden of proof put upon them i.e. the birdkeeper has to prove that the birds are legally in captivity and not as it should be that the prosecution has to prove that the birds are illegally in captivity and because of the financial burdens placed on
defending such actions, some members of the BBC and IOA simply plead guilty as they cannot afford to challenge the resources of the RSPCA in court.

  

In précis the RSPCA are pursuing, for their own political agenda, the persecution of law abiding aviculturists, gaining confidential information from the Police that would not be available to any other organisation or member of the public, using their considerable financial backing to pursue private prosecutions and abusing their status as a charity. They have somehow gained influence in the corridors of powers, probably because of the
limited resources of the Police in pursuing such low priority crime which they are quite happy to see the RSPCA pursuing as it saves their resources for other crime. They have stepped over the threshold with regards to their charitable status and if they wish to continue in this vain then they should set out their agenda clearly to their donors, be stripped of their charitable status and also be treated as any other member of the public by the Police and other government bodies.

 

  

Regards

  

Chris Boyce

 

Chairman British Bird Council

 

 

 

Anyone wishing to make their own submission to this review can do so by following this link:

 

RSPCA REVIEW