• Forum/Server Upgrade If you are reading this you have made it to the upgraded forum. Posts made on the old forum after 26th October 2023 have not been transfered. Everything else should be here. If you find any issues please let us know.

RSPCA working with pets at home

I disagree.

The RSPCA were in partnership with Pets at Home during the "trial" and that still went on. The RSPCA are just looking for another way to make money.
 
It will take an awful lot to adjust the perspective of Pets At Home (not all the staff, but their views in general).

They came to see our RSPCA Centre and commented on how long some of our bunnies have been in our care and how they could have got them all homes really easily and quickly. But of course they would! Totally misses the point of what we do. Anyone could rehome an animal, but not everyone can rehome responsibly, in the best interests of the animal.
 
It will take an awful lot to adjust the perspective of Pets At Home (not all the staff, but their views in general).

They came to see our RSPCA Centre and commented on how long some of our bunnies have been in our care and how they could have got them all homes really easily and quickly. But of course they would! Totally misses the point of what we do. Anyone could rehome an animal, but not everyone can rehome responsibly, in the best interests of the animal.

Quite right. When I got Pebbles from the adoption section of P@H all the girl asked me was "are you 18". She seemed a bit ditzy really.
 
Probably won't change anything. Much like the RSPCA freedom foods, I imagine it really means nothing.
And doesn't that guy in the video have scary eyes and eyebrows!
 
Will watch this and see what happens. I'm not going to condemn it as hopefully some good will come out of this partnership - even if the RSPCA want to make money they can still do that and have an influence on welfare.
 
Will watch this and see what happens. I'm not going to condemn it as hopefully some good will come out of this partnership - even if the RSPCA want to make money they can still do that and have an influence on welfare.

But they still allowed the trial to go ahead, if they won't/can't influence things like that, then what exactly will they do? (not arguing with you just thinking allowed I guess lol)

The RSPCA have been in partnership with P@H for some time now without much, if any difference to how the shop trades. And the money made from this will just go straight to head office, which sits in a lovely bank account rather than actually helping animals.
 
Obviously I've known about this for a long time. It was happening during the SVIP rabbit trial. With everyone's research on here I passed on the information to my boss who passed it onto her boss all the way up the line to HQ. The RSPCA didn't know that Pets at Home were doing the trial. Without the people on RU they wouldn't have known either. I can tell you they weren't happy for a few reasons. I've not been able to say much before because I didn't know how much I could say, but now they've announced they're working with Pets at Home I feel I should say something. I'm only a trustee for my branch so I can't speak for the whole of the charity, but we're really not to sure on this. It seems like a good idea on the surface and the charity can influence Pets at Home, but how much? They will not stop selling live animals (and we asked) and the idea behind a pet shop goes against everything we believe in. But then again if we can stop them selling small hutches etc, then it is a good thing. Personally I'm not sure either way.

But I can say the RSPCA did not know about the VIP rabbits, it was thanks to RU they found out. As far as I know the details now are that Pets at Home are trying to find a 'source' of them in the UK. Not sure how I feel about that either, but that's what's going on now. I'm not even sure if I should be telling you. :lol:
 
BLINK, man, BLINK! :shock:

I'd love to think that this will have a huge impact on animal welfare, especially for those animals which are actually sold at P@H (because it is not just rabbits sold to inappropriate homes) and that their hutches and cages would increase in size, or be sold for appropriate animals, but I can't help but be pessimistic at the minute and think this will make no difference. P@H are a huge company, with company ideals and profit margins etc etc, I highly doubt they are going to listen to the RSPCA.
 
But I can say the RSPCA did not know about the VIP rabbits, it was thanks to RU they found out. As far as I know the details now are that Pets at Home are trying to find a 'source' of them in the UK. Not sure how I feel about that either, but that's what's going on now. I'm not even sure if I should be telling you. :lol:


Sorry don't buy that, but nevermind my opinion still stands that I don't see this as a good thing, it will just give P@H a superiority complex.
 
You might not, but it's the truth.

It's what you have been told, that doesn't make it the truth ;)
And even if they really didn't, why didn't they stop it as soon as they found out considering the partnership had already been formed? Which then backs up that the partnership is pretty pointless :?
 
Dont think it'll make a scrap of difference

Sorry but I too struggle to understand how the RSPCA were unaware of the trial.

Also, how can they endorse this as being factual on the profile of the P@H Veterinary Advisor:

'I am now Head of Pets for Pets at Home and am involved in all areas of health and welfare of our pets, fish and reptiles. This fascinating role involves liaising with our suppliers and checking where our pets come from, supervising their care in store and overseeing our Support Adoption centres in their wonderful work. We are very proud of our pet care and with the help of my experienced and dedicated Pet Team we aim to ensure that welfare is never compromised'.

It's a load of tosh, IMO.
 
I hope the RSPCA will be working with them to increase the sizes of cages they sell especially the hamster ones as they are much smaller than the RSPCA guidelines! I've not looked at their hutches so can't comment on that.
 
Sorry don't buy that, but nevermind my opinion still stands that I don't see this as a good thing, it will just give P@H a superiority complex.

You are correct, the RSPCA DID know about the "trial" by Pets at Home and that 'trial' is continuing, 'Partners in crime' springs to mind with those two
 
Before this turns into an RSPCA slanging match. :roll: I just want to point out that many people on the forum work for certain branches and they are wonderful! My local rspca certainly is amazing. :love:
 
Before this turns into an RSPCA slanging match. :roll: I just want to point out that many people on the forum work for certain branches and they are wonderful! My local rspca certainly is amazing. :love:

Thank you. :thumb:

I'm bowing out of this thread as I've said my piece and I'll just be repeating myself. :)
 
Who is working that chap? you cant even see the strings , it almost lifelike!

I lost my girl on Friday and went in pets at home today to see if there were any in the adoption centre suitable as a new partner for Sooty. There werent any in . On the way out I looked at a giant 4 month old bunny for sale. Absoloutly beautiful but too lively for Sooty. The girl on duty told me they were told it was a boy but she thought its too nice to be a boy :evil: and they had got it wrong and it was a girl :evil:. doesnt she know that it is very hard to tell until his boy bits have appeared.
She seemed pretty clueless. what she knew about rabbits she probably could have written on the back of a postage stamp (if she can write ).
Why are so many places breading rabbits when ther are so many needing homes rant rant rant
These are living beings that they are dabbling with :evil:

sorry i am very sensitive just now as just lost one :cry:
 
How can an organisation which is meant to protect animals and campaign for animal welfare support a pet shop? Pet shop animals are supplied by animal farmers, they do not ensure the animals are going into homes which are suitable and are not too concerned about where the animals came from.
 
Back
Top