Tim Bonner: RSPCA retires as prosecutor

Two weeks ago I related the long road the RSPCA had travelled back to reason and respectability and concluded that 'whilst we may still disagree on some issues, not least the RSPCA's continuing obsession with private prosecutions…we can now work together on campaigns that actually improve the welfare of animals'.

Little did I know that even that obsession had already been set aside and that yesterday Chief Executive Chris Sherwood would announce that the RSPCA would be giving up its role as a prosecutor saying: "We believe this responsibility should sit with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), which is a statutory public body with regulatory oversight."

This is an extraordinary turnaround from the RSPCA's reaction to the report of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee report four years ago which came up with exactly this recommendation. At the time, EFRA Chairman, Neil Parish MP, said: "The RSPCA does important work investigating animal welfare cases. And I would like to see its dedicated and professional staff continue that vital work. The Committee is not convinced, however, that the RSPCA is in a better position than the Crown Prosecution Service when it comes to prosecuting animal welfare cases. It should step back from making prosecutions itself, continuing instead to work closely with the police and prosecution service to protect the welfare of animals."

In its response to the EFRA report, the Government confirmed that "Resources alone…are never a bar to prosecution" and that the CPS would therefore bring any case that passed the evidential and public interest tests. There seemed no good reason to do anything other than accept the recommendation. Instead, however, the then RSPCA council indulged in another orgy of internal bloodletting and sacked its Chief Executive for daring to apologise for the way it had carried out some prosecutions in the past.

Whilst fundamentalists within the RSPCA who held sway in 2016 may have been able to ignore logic and evidence, the fundamental arguments against systematic private prosecution have only strengthened. With new leadership and a new strategy looking forward for the next 10 years, RSPCA trustees clearly felt they could no longer justify its unique and controversial prosecution function.

Interestingly, Chris Packham - who is an RSPCA vice-President - came out strongly against the decision saying: "I'd like to see a return to the charity taking its own wildlife crime prosecutions and pushing them through forcefully. None of the other smaller charities has the clout or the cash to do this, so if the RSPCA won't either, then we will have to find other means. If the law is broken, wildlife criminals must be prosecuted."

Two points come out of Mr Packham's intervention. The first is that he clearly has no idea of what the organisation he is vice-President of actually does as wildlife crime has always been marginal in the RSPCA's work. For instance, in 2019 just 3% of the 1425 convictions it achieved involved wildlife crimes. The second is that the RSPCA should be emboldened by the criticism. Few people have Chris Packham's ability to be quite so consistently wrong. If he is opposed to the RSPCA's plan it is almost certainly the right thing to do.

While you are here: You may have heard that the outdoor clothing company, Patagonia, has recently started funding and promoting a group called the 'Moorland Monitors'. This group engages in the routine harassment of gamekeepers, who play a crucial and legitimate role in maintaining landscapes and enhancing biodiversity. Patagonia's decision to do work with this group is deeply unsettling for rural communities; including those who hunt, shoot and fish. Please sign our latest petition alerting Patagonia's CEO, Ryan Gellert, to your concerns about this new relationship.