I WRITE in response to your correspondent Ken Holmes ('Malicious moaners', August 4).

Mr Holmes believes the RSPCA is campaigning for improved animal welfare legislation simply to benefit its "high profile", and that it should ignore complaints of suffering until the integrity of the complainant has been checked out.

The RSPCA is indeed calling for animal welfare laws to be updated. Why? Because as the law now stands we have to wait until an animal is physically suffering before we can step in.

We believe - and one would hope Mr Holmes would agree - that this is unacceptable.

We want fewer animals to endure pain and fear and we want to achieve this by ensuring owners have a legal obligation to care for their pets properly. We want to be able to step in when we believe suffering is likely.

Mr Holmes complains that the RSPCA causes concern to innocent people who are investigated because of malicious complaints.

But if a pet owner cares for their animal well they have nothing to fear.

Unfortunately, a minority are cruel to animals - they allow them to starve, attack them with knives, microwave them or hang them from trees. The RSPCA is duty-bound to investigate every complaint of cruelty it receives - and it makes no apologies for this.

Those investigations save lives, something even Mr Holmes must applaud.

Heather Holmes,

RSPCA regional press officer - North,

Regional Headquarters,

Leeds.

Updated: 11:31 Monday, August 16, 2004