The Cat Survival Trust Cat Survival Trust

Those images are absolutely shocking. I did wonder if the whole 'reluctant to use modern medicines' thing had been exxagerated somewhat, but those conditions look terrible. Its so sad and I'm just relieved that a better future awaits those poor cats who remain on site.

I'm always somewhat perplexed by how places like this are licensed - local authorities seem to have far too much say in what gets permitted and what doesn't!
 
Sand Cat said:
I did wonder if the whole 'reluctant to use modern medicines' thing had been exxagerated somewhat
Click to expand...

Considering the first item among the following....

TeaLovingDave said:
the last official newsletter of the Cat Survival Trust (posted to FB in May 2022 and written by Moore) contains very little information about the trust, and literally hundreds of words on subjects such as:

  • Conspiracy theories about the COVID pandemic, and about the existence of viruses and bacteria at all.
  • Conspiracy theories about NATO and the USA orchestrating the war in Ukraine in order to steal oil.
  • General undefined conspiracy theories about the powers that be

...to name but a few.
Click to expand...

...I already knew that if anything it was liable to be an understatement.
 
I'm so confused, he's been told he is going to be banned for 5 years, also 10K fine, but sentencing is not until 30th May. Surely he's been told the sentence?

Images are most upsetting.

I'm pretty sure he had a DWA, the animals would have been removed instantly if he didn't, but you can't run events or photo days on a DWA, only have a maximum of 7 open days a year.
 
Alwaysevergreen said:
I'm so confused, he's been told he is going to be banned for 5 years, also 10K fine, but sentencing is not until 30th May. Surely he's been told the sentence?

Images are most upsetting.

I'm pretty sure he had a DWA, the animals would have been removed instantly if he didn't, but you can't run events or photo days on a DWA, only have a maximum of 7 open days a year.
Click to expand...
As I understand it, you cannot have a DWA license to cover numerous animals. The license not only covers the named animal but would also any movement of said animal with appropriate permission. If he tried to just use a DWA license it would cost him a fortune
 
Looking at the gov U.K. website even if you don’t have a zoo licence you still need an exemption to it from the local council to have wild animals and then not display them to the public for more than 7 days in every 12 months. If this is right (happy to be corrected) then he must have had some sort of regulatory contact so what were they doing all the time he was neglecting the animals? Seems strange all round to be able to acquire a lot of big cats and then neglect them for a good amount of time before anything is done.

Judging by reviews on line lots of photo tours in particular went on - lots of people visiting without any official permission etc. All things you’d hope wouldn’t go on for so long. It’s easy to find dozens of photos online of people handling snow leopards and photographing animals being fed up close etc at the location - makes you realise you really need to check a place out carefully as to whether it is within the law etc before visiting.
 
Lafone said:
Looking at the gov U.K. website even if you don’t have a zoo licence you still need an exemption to it from the local council to have wild animals and then not display them to the public for more than 7 days in every 12 months. If this is right (happy to be corrected) then he must have had some sort of regulatory contact so what were they doing all the time he was neglecting the animals? Seems strange all round to be able to acquire a lot of big cats and then neglect them for a good amount of time before anything is done.

Judging by reviews on line lots of photo tours in particular went on - lots of people visiting without any official permission etc. All things you’d hope wouldn’t go on for so long. It’s easy to find dozens of photos online of people handling snow leopards and photographing animals being fed up close etc at the location - makes you realise you really need to check a place out carefully as to whether it is within the law etc before visiting.
Click to expand...
I totally agree, in one of my previous posts I said that I thought that the local authority was partly to blame. It's nearly two years since the police and vet paid their visit and were obviously concerned! and yet things continued in the same way, unbelievable!
 
Lafone said:
What an outcome from 'not liking modern medicine' - ludicrous thinking. The animals lost out. The court did recognise he wasn't trying to be cruel hence the ban length I guess, but the road to hell is paved etc.

Given his age I suppose a 5 year ban will be effective long term.

Surprised to see 31 animals still in place but I guess some will be the domestic cats referred to in the article.

Cat Survival Trust owner faces animal ban after conviction
Click to expand...
No it doesn’t apply to the domestic cats as they are not his or part of the charity
 
AnimalEducation5 said:
No it doesn’t apply to the domestic cats as they are not his or part of the charity
Click to expand...

Given they were reported to be unvaccinated and un neutered in the court reporting, what a pity they are not included. Bit of sleight of hand by the sound of it.

Still that appears to leave 31 exotic animals in the hands of someone convicted of animal cruelty. Seems sad to me. I start to wonder what you actually have to do to have animals removed.
 
Is Mr Moore allowed to have any contact with the animals that he has been prosecuted for cruelty with? and will his membership of BIAZA be removed?
 
The court has decided to allow the cats to be left on site for another 6 months, with instruction given to Terry to re-home them all by the end of November. Unfortunately, no authority could seize the animals and pay for costs of rehoming, so the cats remain in the care of a man found guilty of causing unnecessary suffering to animals. All the cats, of which there are over 30 left, have been left to endure many more months of neglect and poor welfare
 
Bumblebee23 said:
The court has decided to allow the cats to be left on site for another 6 months, with instruction given to Terry to re-home them all by the end of November. Unfortunately, no authority could seize the animals and pay for costs of rehoming, so the cats remain in the care of a man found guilty of causing unnecessary suffering to animals. All the cats, of which there are over 30 left, have been left to endure many more months of neglect and poor welfare
Click to expand...
I'm speechless!!!!!
 
Yes annoying as apparently the Police had homes for all cats to go to, but now because they don’t want to pay the bill or the council (which tbh I don’t blame them as will be us that pays ultimately and he should be paying to move them and sort homes), it will be a long drawn out process. Can’t see him being in a rush to move them on so like you wondering what happens in November?! ‍♀️
No suspended sentence, community service… nothing?! The fine and costs were a joke in relation to the charges. Poor animals
 
Panthera1981 said:
And what happens if they’re not rehomed by the end of November?
Click to expand...

Euthanasia was raised but is highly unlikely, I doubt the council will want the public outcry that will bring. Probably an extension will be allowed. Given Terry's unwillingness to re-home any of the cats, they could remain there a lot longer than 6 months. Or in the worst outcome, be euthanised in the end anyway. Either way it could be a very sad outcome for those animals
 
Bumblebee23 said:
Euthanasia was raised but is highly unlikely, I doubt the council will want the public outcry that will bring. Probably an extension will be allowed. Given Terry's unwillingness to re-home any of the cats, they could remain there a lot longer than 6 months. Or in the worst outcome, be euthanised in the end anyway. Either way it could be a very sad outcome for those animals
Click to expand...

What a mess! It's a very sad state of affairs that these animals remain in danger.
 
I have know of this god forsaken man for over 10 years, have had the misfortune of seeing some of the horrors that go on there and know some of the past volunteers all of which can't stand Terry or his methods. One branded him a vile man with no regard for animal welfare. Many have questioned his mental stability, I myself have been on the receiving end of his conspiracy theory rants telling bird flu isn't real, viruses don't exist, and cats don't need any space when I questioned him about the tiny enclosures and how he had 6 lynx in a 4 x 4 enclosure. To leave a man so obviously unstable in control of such dangerous animals is ridiculous. The local authority should be ashamed as to the judge who allowed this. Can you imagine how many poor animals have suffered at his hands over the 40 years he's had that site, how many have been left to die with no medication, no pain relief. How a council can use lack of money as an excuse for this **** show is beyond me. Shame on you. Poor animals
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top