********************

The two letters below are from the Observer 25/7/99:

What we regard as inaccuracies in your article (News, last week) mean the conclusion you draw - that hens under the RSPCA's 'Freedom Food' scheme endure worse conditions than battery hens - is entirely unfounded.

You claim that Freedom Food farms stock an average of 12 hens per square metre compared to eight battery hens in the same space. The average UK stocking density for battery hens is in fact 20 hens per square meter. Most Freedom Food free-range farms are stocked at 11.7 hens to the square metre with additional space for perching and nesting, and unlimited daytime access to the range.##Your article seems to ignore the fact that battery hens are caged, unable to spread their wings, to leave the unit, to dustbathe, scratch, perch or use nest boxes. For these very reasons battery systems are excluded from the Freedom Food scheme.

RSPCA welfare standards insist that there is adequate perching space, nest boxes and litter for dustbathing. Under the scheme free-range birds must have a minimum of 83 sq. cms. of nesting space, not 20 sq. cms. as you suggested. We feel it is grossly inaccurate to say the RSPCA tells farmers they can put up to 16.000 hens in a 16mX50, shed. Under UK law free-range hens must have unlimited daytime access to pasture. Freedom Food standards require large pop holes in sheds which are designed to enourage the birds to use them.

The freedom Food scheme using RSPCA standards has already achieved an enormous improvement in farm animal welfare and what we feel is inaccurate and sensational jounalism confuses the consumer which can then delay the development of better welfare standards to the detriment of millions of farm animals.

John Rolls
Communications director, RSPCA
Horsham
W.Sussex
_______________________________________________________________________________________________

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) charter requires the organisation to safequard the welfare of all animals, not just cats and dogs.

In light of Channel 4's Free as a Bird documentary and last Sunday's Observer article exposing how thousands of chickens are crammed into a shed so tightly that they can barely breathe, the RSPCA have violated our trust. It needs to withdraw the 'Freedom Foods' labelling programme, no matter how much farmers pay to participate. That money is as dirty as the mud patch those poor chickens were allowed to stand in when allowed outside.

Even the RSPCA's head of farm animal 'welfare' admits that the five freedoms on which the scheme is based, are 'unobtainable in practice'. There is no such thing as 'cruelty-free' meat. The manner in which birds and other animals are manhandled, confined, deprived of their natural instinctive and pleasurable behaviours and pastimes don't disappear when you slap on a pretty lable.

Face it, if everyone who worked on the 'killing floor' and in factory farms was kind and gentle, the process would grind to a halt. Forget for a moment how it must be for chickens as they hang upside down on the conveyor belt, scared to death, approaching the man with the knife. Think about just one of their earlierst experiences, debeaking. These baby chickens' beaks are seared off with a hot blade and without as much as a baby aspirin. The chick may not scream, he or she can only peep, but the fear and suffering is acute.

Would the RSPCA endorse docking spaniels' tails without anaesthetic? The press has givewn us all a peek behind the scenes and it's enough to turn people's stomachs or make them reach for Linda McCartney's frozen veggie meals. Peoiple for the Ethical Treatment of Animals believe that the only sure-fire way to ensure the protection of animals is to stop eating them. We stand ready to help anyone wishing to make the transition to a humane and healthy diet.

Andrew Butler
PETA
London SW 18

Watchdogs along with many RSPCA members and some Council members have always opposed Freedom Food. The idea of being involved in the promotion and marketing of animals as food products is repugnant. Dr Martin Potter RSPCA head of Farm Animal welfare has confirmed that the Five Freedoms are unobtainable. Paul Folca, a retired neuro-surgeon, spoke out against causing pain by beak trimming at the 1995 AGM. To see the instrument that inflicts this pain in action and 8,000 birds crammed into a single Freedom Food hen house was a dreadful and unforgettable sight. Council members what are you doing? Withdraw from Freedom Food NOW!

The RSPCA Council Officers

Chairman N Tomlinson (retired)

We do not wish to be unkind because we know the difficulties people face in adjusting to retirement but is block occupation of all the positions of RSPCA Council Officers the answer?

Where are the trail blazers, the scientists, the writers and the academics to lead the Society into the millenium?

There are certainly two members of Council who are known as writers and scientists why are they repeatedly excluded from office?

At this particular time in the history of the RSPCA, the Society desperately needs a strong Chairman of Council We deplore the re- appointment of Mr Tomlinson as Chairman. We see him as a divisive influence on the Council. (see Watchdog 75) No sooner was he elected for a second term than he issued a divisive statement to the press. He said –

"As Chairman of the AGM I was saddened by some intemperate language used by members which was inappropriate in a meeting where most members were careful to be polite and attentive".

Well, WE ARE SADDENED that Tomlinson should have publicly criticised those members who were very distressed by the heavy presence of so many blood sports enthusiasts. But just in case Tomlinson does not understand why members were upset at the AGM, let him read the list below this of the animals killed by the hunt since he became Chairman of Council. He might do us all a favour and resign.

Did you know that on 24/6/96 after the RSPCA AGM, the Executive Director of the BFSS issued a press statement and said

"The behaviour of the (RSPCA’s) Society’s membership made me wonder if I had wandered into a hunt saboteurs meeting by mistake".

Why does Tomlinson have to join the hunters in attacking RSPCA members?

What the vets say AND what the RSPCA says:
CAN you spot the difference?

(The Vets' conmments were taken from the Hillgrove Campaign Newsletter 13. Tel: 0121 632 6460 Address Box CB, 111 Magdalen Road, Oxford OX4 1RQ

Did you know that in 1988,1991 and 1992,information about rejected motions and clear and acceptable reasons for the rejection was sent to members with the Agenda for the Annual General Meeting Now, apparently, everything said on Council is treated as an official secret. WHY? Is it because Council members are dead scared of members finding out the truth about their behaviour at Council meetings?

Did you know that the Director General wrote to the Daily Telegraph on 29/6/99 to explain Richard Ryder’s motion which was proposed and defeated at the recent AGM He ended his letter by saying that the RSPCA is an animal welfare not an animal rights organisation. We wonder when the Society’s objects were changed because -the Act to incorporate and confer powers upon the RSPCA on 16/6/32 states- "It was established having for its objects the mitigation of animal suffering and the promotion and expansion of the practice of humanity towards the inferior classes of animated beings."
Can’t see the words ’animal welfare there, can you? Surely if granting legal rights to animals would mitigate their suffering, the RSPCA would welcome such action. Or would it?

"Having supported the Society since a teenager, I resisted many calls for membership in early days because of the RSPCA’s refusal to take a stand against hunting. Then they did and I joined. Now in my sixties I am truly saddened at the turn-around in events and the ’mess at the top’. I hope indeed to see a united, strong and truly effective organisation before I die. Animals need such support today more than at any time. Reported horrors grow daily whilst the Society set up to combat the evil spends its huge funds on opulent premises and seems set on shooting itself in the foot".

(Here is a case for rational debate in which we feel Freedom Food Ltd would be the loser. As Peter Davies is a devotee of Freedom Food and appreciates rational debate perhaps he would not be afraid to initiate a debate. Or would he?

W’Dog has been asked how we knew that there were 21 motions submitted for the AGM It may seem strange to the Council but W’Dogs actually communicate with other RSPCA members. Here goes- we were involved in the submission of 11 motions. Other RSPCA members told us about 5 motions that had been sent. 5 motions were published – 2 on the Agenda paper and 3 in the Daily Telegraph. 11 + 5 + 5 = 21. Simple isn’t it!

Absurdity and secrecy join hands in the actions of the Council. Is it not absurd that the Council campaigns against hunting with hounds whilst admitting thousands of hunters into membership? Or even more absurd writes to the Prime minister on behalf of RSPCA members to welcome the banning of hunting knowing that a large vocal number of members want no such thing? As for Freedom Food is it not absurd to imagine that debeaking does not cause pain or the horrors of the slaughterhouse do not cause fear and distress to animals?

Can anyone be certain? what about debeaking? What about slaughter? What about 4000 birds crammed in a single henhouse?
Will the Council wait for yet another TV exposure of Freedom Food before refusing the company anymore financial help? As for secrecy GROW UP Council members speak about what you know is wrong. Don’t be frightened of bullies or a nightmare could become reality.

Thanks for all your letters and phone calls and financial help for producing Watchdog. PLEASE continue to help and we will continue to BARK!

THE WATCHDOGS