ITS mission is to prevent animal cruelty and suffering – by whatever means.
Each year, more than 1,000 people are convicted of animal cruelty offences thanks to actions brought about by the RSPCA.
Around 97 per cent of all cases heard by the courts end in successful prosecution – 13 per cent more than the Crown Prosecution Service – yet with the success comes a hefty price tag.
Most cases are bankrolled by the charity, each year costing millions of pounds.
As reported in the Daily Echo this week, the RSPCA was successful in banning a Hampshire couple who kept more than 120 rabbits in cramped hutches soaked with droppings and urine from keeping rabbits.
The result was the one they were after – but they were left with a bill for more than £100,000 for the prosecution.
The charity brought the case against Dawn and Pete Bundy after discovering 126 animals kept at the pair’s house in filthy hutches, some infested with maggots, in October last year. The court heard the rabbits had been deliberately housed in small hutches to stop them growing too big.
They were not exercised for up to seven months at a time, and some could not stand on their hind legs or stretch out in their hutches.
The couple were ordered to pay £1,000 towards the cost of the case – but the RSPCA was left to pick up the £101,465.63 balance.
Legal fees set the charity back around £20,000 – the rest was made up of veterinary bills and the cost of housing the animals for a year.
Speaking after the case, RSPCA inspector Christine Coleman explained the cost of the case is something the charity had to accept.
She said: “It is a huge bill to pick up but our aim is to prevent cruelty to animals so it had to be done.
“The welfare of these rabbits was our main concern and the Bundys have now been disqualified from keeping the remaining rabbits or any rabbits in future.”
Although animal cruelty is a criminal offence, the RSPCA takes on the role of the prosecutor – and therefore is liable to pick up the fees.
RSPCA spokeswoman Emma Nutbrown said: “The RSPCA is recognised for its expertise and therefore takes the lead in the enforcement of animal cruelty laws.
“The upside is that we can see convictions through to the very end and ensure the people committing these offences don’t do so again.
“The downside is that it costs us a lot of money each year which we get no help with.
“It is a balancing act and we don’t go wasting money, but the whole point of the charity is to prevent animal cruelty so we can’t put a price on enforcing it.”
In 2007 the RSPCA investigated 137,245 cases of animal cruelty, 1,860 of which were reported to the charity’s prosecutions department.
That resulted in 1,104 convictions and 861 orders banning people from keeping animals.
“We don’t go into houses looking to prosecute people,” said Mrs Nutbrown.
“We give animal owners every chance to change the situation and we will only take them to court if there really is no other option.
“At that point, we look to get them banned from keeping animals to prevent them causing any harm in the future.”
The RSPCA has annual running costs of £82m – and this year’s budget for legal fees and veterinary bills alone is £3m.
Meanwhile, the RSPCA’s animal rescue shelter Stubbington Ark is struggling to raise £1m for a new centre.
“We do very much appreciate all the donations we receive because at the end of the day we are a charity and we don’t get help from anywhere else,” Mrs Nutbrown explained.
“The message to our supporters is really one of reassurance that we will not waste money pursuing cases where we are not likely to get a conviction.
“At the same time, we must send out a message that it is not acceptable in a civilised society to treat animals in this way.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article