Is Mise: "The RSPCA doesn't go to the heart of the matter, were they concerned for the welfare of the animals they would condemn the use of fireworks for entertainment, but tat would be rocking the boat."

1. The RSPCA shouldn't need to advise people that their pets may be disturbed. Everyone who has a dog or cat already knows this, and should keep them inside or in secure surroundings insulated from the noise and sound. My dog, now in pet heaven, freaked at thunderstorms and the sound of hot air balloons (I live near a small rural airstrip). Whenever either came near, I made sure she was in a cubby hole in the quietest part of the house. But, because they do care for the welfare of animals, the RSPCA does regularly warn pet-owners even though such repetition should be unnecessary (they would be entitle to groan: 'doesn't anyone ever learn!').

2. Why should the RSPCA condemn just fireworks which occur on one day of the year? Should they condemn thunder, hot air balloons, noisy outdoor concerts (note the latter two are also just for entertainment) or the numerous other things that occur much more often, over a much wider area or in many more places?

3. The RSPCA sensibly focus their attention on serious animal cruelty. Noisy fireworks, concerts, thunder don't fall into this category because they are not deliberately intended to disturb animals, and the owners can easily protect their pets. One could argue that pet-owners who don't protect their pets from the noise are the ones who should be blamed, not the fireworks or the RSPCA.

You are entitled to not like fireworks. But it is a bit much to try and justify your dislike by dumping on the RSPCA for not trying to close firework displays down. (PS declaration: I have no association whatever with the RSPCA, I just think this is an illogical line of argument).

Cossomby,

If the RSPCA is really concerned about serious acts of cruelty then why don't they condemn the use of 1080 poison?
A poison that kills slowly, often over a day and with considerable agony.

This poison kills more than the targeted pest animals, but no one seems to care.

For those interested in the history and heritage associated with the Malabar Headland and the ANZAC Rifle Range see

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malabar_Headland

Is Mise, you excel at changing the goal posts. I'm not going to buy into the 1080 argument, though I know a bit about it and other pest management. Let's just add the RSPCA and fireworks to the list of things you don't like. Maybe one day you'll make a positive post about something you do like?

I can think of a very good use for a sky rocket or two, but it involves some possible cruelty to a couple of dumb animals as we launch them back to the crazy shoot em' up planet from whence they came, but again no brain no pain, and it would not involve the RSPCA.

Agree Issy and Hassy!

p/s Issy, are you and Hassy conjoined twins sharing the same thing up top, whatever that thing may be, whatever you share?

I like the boys

I don't like the RSPCA as they stick their bib in where it's not wanted and in their anti-hunting mode have criticized and lied about hunters and accused them of cruelty but have never condemned the cruelty of the use of 1080, nor have I heard anything on the subject from those other great conservationists, the Greens.