Pen Farthing - Afghan Animal Rescue

Sorry, you’ve lost me. Are you saying she should have been removed? Because I believe there were others present too intent on preventing it taking place.

 

I would have thought that once the court battle was lost, the owner should have cooperated with the authorities so a vet could attend and put the animal down quietly and calmly.

That would have demonstrated a caring attitude towards animals. Would you agree?

 

No, you are right, it was partly a rhetorical question about the alpaca's owner. But it was a question that would/could provide an interesting answer. But no need to research.

I just felt that you were agreeing with La_tempesta_cielo_68's view without any researching. My view, without researching beyond watching the news, is that what started off as a worthwhile and honourable quest has developed into a rather silly battle that is fuelled by frustration over Defra's intransigence at not making exceptions to the rules. The end, and sad, result was that she allowed her personal battle to outweigh the animals well-being during it's last hours in an attempt to get the authorities looking uncomfortable and over-bearing.

I have adored my pets in the past, not as closely as my family, but closely. My main gripe on animals on these forums has been with dog owners who hang poo-bags on bushes, not with the dogs themselves.

 

What do you think I haven't researched?

I haven't given any view on the decision to euthanise (although I have a view I do not intend to get into a petty argument on here) except to say DFRA were wrong about the badger cull (TB isn't falling it's rising) and they are rarely right about anything

I have given a view that the animal was clearly distressed by being forcibly manhandled into the horse box by ****s in hazmat suits, and that is not a humane process

 

Now there’s a case for euthanasia, and not a humane one…

 

I didn't say you hadn't researched, I was talking to HH24 who said she wouldn't answer my question until she had researched.

But police are usually at these type of events (like evictions) purely to prevent a breach of the peace following a civil courts decision, and at the request of the people who have to carry out the courts decision. It is their duty, and not usually something police want to be involved in.

 

Such a shame then they didn't stop the hazmat suit idiots who were clearly causing distress to an animal (an offence I believe?) and warn them to do their job correctly

Bit much to expect I suppose as most police turn a blind eye to fox hunting so they are hardly going to care about an alpaca

 

Hear, hear. I just don’t understand the thought process.

 

As I said, the police were there to prevent a breach of the peace whilst a civil warrant was being carried out by Defra. They are not there to tell Defra how to do their job. UEA was correct when he explained that the owner refused to cooperate and instead organised a "human shield" around the pen where the animal was being kept in an attempt to prevent the court order being carried out.

In my view, if the owner really cared about Geronimo, she should have arranged for him to be put down quietly - without trying to make a spectacle of it, which caused the unnecessary distress.

BTW, 28,000 animals have been put down due to bovine TB this year. I don't think any of them had to go through such stress as this one did.

 

The police should be there to ensure everyone, the owner, the general public, and DEFRA, observe all law

I'm amazed as an ex policeman you don't see it that way, or then again perhaps not so surprised

 

It had Bovine TB. What was the alternative to death?

 

You obviously think you have expert knowledge of the law concerning animals. You saw what happened, complain to the RSPCA. They will be obliged to follow it up.

If the RSPCA don't take action and charge the Defra official you can tell them how to do their job, as well!

 

It does appear I know more about it than you, again surprising, or not so

Police contracting their responsibilities out to the RSPCA now?

 

No, the police obviously didnt think there was an offence. You think you know better, complain to the RSPCA, or take out a private prosecution.

 

That’s not the point being argued, although if you research the subject you will find the idea the DEFRA test on this animal, and tens of thousands of cattle, is valid and has been challenged.

 

That has already been done and DEFRA can answer in court

Shame the UK Police once again prove themselves as much use as a pork chop at a bar mitzvah

 

The Bhaktivedanta Manor has had 'quite a few' run-ins with DEFRA/HBC/RSPCA over this...and always on the losing side.

 

We could easily fall down a legal hole here but having read it I'd say it's fair to say the purpose of the law prohibiting causing animals unnecessary suffering isn't to capture the actions of approved people executing a lawful warrant. That doesn't mean they could cause gratuitous suffering or act with impunity, but it does mean the law says suffering is less likely to be deemed 'unnecessary' if the overall action was to enforce another law.

 

It can be so and certainly people who are cruel to animals are often cruel to people. But you can also love your horse or dog dearly and not give eff all squared for people living in poverty.

 

Thanks for that, but what you don't know is Alpacas have a head collar when being led, having a rope noose around it's neck will slowly strangle it like George Floyd.

It was transported away from the farm that way, half strangled. Alpacas are transported sitting down. Horses are transported standing.

It's not your fault, Defra didn't know any of that either.

 

I'm of the opinion that we shouldn't have pets at all. I don't see any justification in taming animals and genetically engineering them over generations, just for human enjoyment. I've had a general sense of disquiet for some time over the health conditions that are bred into domesticated animals but recently I've started to think about how unnatural the whole process of separating young animals from their mothers is, all the while creating new types of animal through selective breeding when there is no evolutionary need to keep animals, it is just an emotional one. I accept this is probably a very niche minority view, and I have enjoyed having pets in the past but I just don't think it's right anymore.

 

It's more than 'enjoyment' surely? It's companionship, love, caring. Think of the impact that this would have on mental health, particularly of many vulnerable people living alone for whom a pet is pretty much the epicentre of their existence.

 

I don’t agree as some animals, cats and dogs especially, can live in a highly symbiotic way with humans.

There are tremendous caveats though. The keeping of cats and dogs is predicated on enormous cruelty in the production of cheap petfood and much behaviour of dog owners is abusive, from docking their ears and tails to provoking bad behaviours in them on purpose or simply failing to exercise them.

Don’t get me started on the keeping of other animals. Anyone with an ‘exotic’ pet needs shooting. Large predators are not suitable pets, neither are snakes or reptiles.

Mrs Moose grew up on an estate where the neighbour but one had a Lion in the back garden. I had to visit a home once through work that had a 10 ft Python in a tank. In a high rise. Pets are one thing, human idiocy is a whole other ballgame.

 

Fair enough. Well I see no reason to think the police would know that either. And frankly in the same way a copper wouldn't intervene to tell a firefighter how to rescue a cat or a paramedic how to dress a wound, they were never likely to do anything about the Defra vets' actions either. Deferring to other professionals is normal. If the vets have done wrong they should be dealt with - although the circus they were thrown into will be big mitigation I should imagine.

 

Tell that to my 17 year old cat who loves his 5 star hotel.

 

You may be right; a large proportion of people on social media who have pictures of dogs or cats and make a big deal of it are right-wing bigots who don't give a **** for refugees, unemployed, homeless etc. Similar to vociferous 'christians'.

 

https://twitter.com/RacistPets

 

I accept that pets play an important role for many people and there is genuine love and companionship - my point isn't about individuals' relationships with their pets, rather the overall concept of keeping pets. It's a one way street - the pet has no choice in the matter and they grow to love their owners as surrogates for their animal family/pack (and the controller of their food supply). There's no other example of a species subjugating others for their needs and it seems unnatural to me, particularly when you think we breed them over and over again for qualities/looks we see desirable but are nothing like their wild descendants. I'm sure most pets are happy in their environment, particularly as they have known nothing else, but it doesn't seem right to me.

 

Yes, your argument is a good one although I am not totally sure about the point about no species subjugating others: ants 'farm' aphids, for example.

 

Aww, I was expecting racist pets, not racist Brits.