Are You Serious Jo

I hope this finally is the thing that forces change and Lola actually does change her operating methods. Sometimes the biggest hindrance is getting the person in charge to see there are other ways and you can't save everything. I really hope you guys can make a difference.

Italy has spoken and we all know how much tralee loves the Italians and their maremmas :laugh:

Maybe tralee you could talk to zoiboy a bit more about showing because you seem to be having some difficulties that zoiboy doesn't seem to be having. I think it's unrealistic, not to mention very unfair, to expect our judges to judge a dog but not be allowed to touch it. Since the other LGD breeds seem to manage being shown and retain their working ability it obviously can be done. I would actually put in a formal complaint if I saw a judge award a dog without touching it, how can they judge to the standard if they can't actually feel what they are supposed to be feeling?

I would be most unhappy to be beaten in the ring by a dog that the judge couldn't actually judge. It seems pretty simple to me, if your dog won't allow handling then don't show it. There are some people showing Anatolians that do quite well and their dogs let the judge go over them, and they have a much stronger working temperament than Maremmas. I can't watch the video but sounds like the dog is pulling away from the judge?

It's not nice for the human watching the dog get shot but really, it's one of the best ways to go. The alternative is a trip to the vet which would scare some dogs then strangers holding the dog tight to put a needle into the vein. People constantly confuse how they would feel with what a dog would feel.

I don't have any current info so can't say what it is like now but when I first found out about it there was more than just mess wrong with the place. The dogs not up for adoption were in a bad way but they had food and shelter so the rspca couldn't do anything. There were people in the Riverland trying to get things under control for years but everyone knows how hard it is to get the rspca to act, unless you show your debarked dog, that gets action. The council don't bother because like PR, it makes them look proactive. This is not just a case of people reacting to no kill, there were things that were very wrong there. It is also harder to get action in a community that overall doesn't value pets, a lot have the philosophy that if your dog or cat that runs around gets killed you just grab another freebie from one of the many BYB litters around. I really hope things are better because it was pretty dire and I'm not talking about gossip but verifiable facts.

I can't remember if there was a subsequent thread, but there was one that did result in them changing practice and desexing everything just after that. Some of it was off DOL as well.

There were (can't say it is still the case) some dogs that were unrehomable and they were warehoused because of the no kill thing. They should have been PTS for sure, but some people can't do that because they care more about their emotions than the poor dog that sits in substandard kennels for years on end.

Can't help someone who doesn't want help. You can't force Lola to change her save them all philosophy and my offers of help were ignored. But at least the DOL rescue police got them to desex more before rehoming, having lived in the area the last thing it needs is more entire pets being practically given away.

Should be, wasn't all that long ago, 2-3 years? I was still living not that far from them at the time.

Moorook were borderline hoarders and until we had a massive thread here about them they weren't desexing either. The rspca needed to finally act with this place. One of those places that reminded you there were worse things than being PTS, but I think some of their new vollies were working hard to sort the issues out.

They were withdrawn because you accepted the control order instead of a DD one. They gave you a choice right, accept a control order, accept a dangerous dog order or go to court. All terms dictated by the council not you. The fact your dogs are under a control order means you lost. If you won there would be no control order. Do you really truly believe you won or do you think people can't read the judgement and just take your word for it. I don't understand why you still insist it is a BSL matter when it's a generic breed DD matter. You can scramble a whole lot of words out of context but it doesn't change the fact you lost. I hope you abide by the conditions set down by the council and realise they could have made things much much worse for you.

Sounds like you were actually very lucky tralee and I'd be a whole lot nicer to those rangers

I just realised, if they all had a DD order would they have to wear muzzles at shows or are the show grounds exempt? That would be an end to showing if they did. It looks like the council were actually quite considerate because they could have refused to settle and if you lost you'd be a hell of a lot worse off. They must have had enough to put a case forward because otherwise your barrister would have advised to go to court. You might want to look at the council in a more positive light tralee because they could have sunk you and they didn't, not sure that makes them greedy and corrupt.

I'm not sure why your having a go at Mel, they are right, your dogs have a control order, you admitted this yourself. You didn't win at all and for your sake it might be good to understand what you have to do in order to keep your dogs safe from further council intervention. If you'd won you would have walked away with no control order. No one offers to have a control order put on their dogs at their request unless the alternative is worse, so you just took the lesser of two evils but the power was with the council. That is not winning.

Thanks for explaining that Mel, it's not an area that I've had to go into so an interpretation is helpful. Tralee, do you understand what Mel has said and why your heading and assertions are untrue? I would hate to see anyone disputing a DD case to get the wrong end of the stick based on this thread.

Ok, thanks for answering. It appears thought that you didn't win unconditionally then and the council do have some continuing control over your dogs. I understand you settled but it was with a council order. It might be best to be completely upfront because it might lead to others getting themselves into trouble. If you don't have your dogs behind six foot fences can the council reinstate the DD order? That's not the same as having it revoked. As the future owner of an Anatolian I want to get the feel for council attitudes to LGDs.

Yes, I read that before, but what happens if you don't put your dogs in runs? What will the council do if your dogs aren't in runs?

What would have happened if you didn't agree to keep the dogs in runs? Was it presented to you as an option you could choose? I don't understand because it all points to you having the dogs not declared as long as they are kept in runs. If it were revoked unconditionally why the concession of runs in exchange for non DD status? You already considering having runs doesn't mean you chose it if they required it to drop the DD order. A clear understanding of all this could help people with unfair DD orders. So the main question is what would the council do if you didn't put them in runs?

A necropsy would be the first thing I'd be doing

You can't put your names against animals in SA. But I do think this needs to be reported and the council and rspca deal with it.

I expect that if you can't find anything specifically then it reverts to general law. You can't just keep a wallet you find, or a car on the street so you can't keep something you find without some legal process. I know some councils are strict and they insisted on coming out at 10pm one night to collect a stray puppy, wouldn't even wait till morning.

I haven't read every post by PR in all places because there is just so much and I'm packing to leave for interstate so you might be right. I know they did claim rat poison a while ago and have seen screenshots of people asking and then PR saying can't say. The story constantly changes, one dog Delta was on deaths door while another of the PR groupies was saying how playful she was. People I don't know have been asking for more details but the posts just get deleted if they are insistent. She doesn't want to put anything too concrete in writing because she knows she has no proof. I'm about to leave for Canberra so I'll be in a better position to jump in again. I know MN is reading because she said so today so take note MN, you can threaten and harass all you like but most people aren't scared. In fact, you have made things even easier

That was posted a while ago but if you ask now you won't get a concrete answer.

No, no details of the "poisoning" and other FB posts on the same dogs give no indication anything happened. Numerous people have asked PR on their page for details but the closest they get is can't talk about it due to the court case. Except there is no court case and no reports to anyone official :laugh: