Are You Serious Jo

I think the point was they can't be registered anywhere. The non ANKC registries are accepted here but not breeding dogs that can't be registered at all.

That was an error on my part, I was thinking of the invoice and montage at the same time, told you I was not on the ball! But, she still has a schedule 4 drug with no sign of a vet sticker. I'm pretty sure you are required to always put a label on prescription drugs when prescribing. She has a lot worse going on though so it's not a biggie, just another bit of bad behaviour in a whole lot of bad behaviour.

So are you saying the drugs were not dispensed by a vet? How else could she have gotten them? She bought them from a company who stocks it, there is a picture of the invoice that lists them and pictures of the boxes of drugs that a whistleblower took. Go check PRB, it's all there.

What are the chances that she is only using them under vet instruction :laugh:

It was the lies about the drugs that was exposed, she claimed they were vet prescribed (as in only use vet prescribed) and they weren't. She got away with the shock collars because they weren't in use but I think she might have flagged herself now.

Thanks, I'm not as sharp as I usually am so would probably take me a week.

State government. But which department?

Does anybody know who local council are answerable to?

I know what you mean, they are the best option but it's a risk. But if you don't do anything the damage is possibly greater. I'm listening to the experienced people right now and catching up on what has been done so just thinking out loud really.

The only reason those drugs and collars weren't used was they were outed before she had a chance. She also has done the spiel about only medicating under veterinary advice but that invoice and lack of prescription stickers proves that stock wasn't from a vet. The thing that worries me about the media is that some might take it and run with a BSL angle. It's no secret they take bully types and how do you ensure that it won't end up as a breed thing. But I can't see many other options if the council are really scared of her.

Pft, all you need are drugs and shock collars when you take those problem dogs!

I'm working on getting them but I really am not going to discuss much here anymore as I don't want to reveal things being done. Don't take that as an admission that there isn't anything to get them on, just that I don't think they need to know some things till it drops on their heads.

Would appear if they have written criteria then that PR fit that criteria as they are still there. No, it could also mean that there has been no follow up. If PR don't report to the council and the council don't chase up reports then they would still be there.

If a FOI request has to be used to get those documents so be it.

T is talking about Hawksbury, and someone correct me if I am wrong, but it is Blacktown that has the RTRO conditions.

I don't have a phone at home, no mobile reception there either so I'm limited to the net. I'll pm you anyway.

As I said, I don't have them, am chasing them up and I believe Nic when she says they exist.

In the main I agree but what "rules" are they breaking ? Do you have a link or similar to these - is there an agreement in existence in writing that they have to sign to operate with council? I think Nic has them, I don't yet but I'm staying home today and chasing up things.

Sorry Im not buying it - everything they have been accused of has been presented to council and they continue to operate and whilst they may have done what they are accused of with RTRO dogs and not followed council procedure or policy in reporting back outcomes in the main they are within council policy because anyone can take any dog out of the pound without screening and without proper temp testing - in the main all they do is operate as an agent to let people know where the dogs are. If you are going after changes and accountability council have to be clear about what their policy is which makes a rescue group eligible for certain concessions - to date its nothing more than holding a 16D - and have written policies in place of what constitutes a breach and what they will do about it if a breach is bought to their attention and what they will do about it if they see its guilty - and which will enable them to identify what they consider to be ethical which applies to all rescue groups without exemption. Going after PR or any other person or group until thats in place is doing no one any good in my opinion. Did you see the posts about the conditions of taking RTRO dogs? Just because the council are slack at enforcing those conditions doesn't mean they don't exist. Some pretty cluey people have been working on this for some time and I don't think they are lying about it. Council will be reluctant to act because they don't want to stop PR because they make them look good but doesn't mean they don't have clearly worded polices that other groups already follow. But I'm not going to go into much here because I don't want PR to know what is being done.

In terms of PR ethics is not an operational term right now because while they are clearly unethical it won't be on this front that they will be removed. If they are let continue then self determined ethics won't matter because regulation will be forced on everyone and it is likely they won't take submissions. The fact is that they are breaking rules that already exist and people should be working on those.

Steve, talking about how do we determine what is ethical and how is it policed is moot in this context. What we have is a rescue that does not follow already existing council policy, it's black and white. What is not so easy is to get council to enforce their own policies. PR deliberately have off shoots everywhere and there is a huge amount of information to decipher. But the tools to take them down are there, it's just a matter of finding the best way to use them.

It was said about that council require (through pounds) rescue to adhere to certain conditions in order to continue to work with that pound. It might not be law but if it is up to the discretion of the pound as to whether they work with a particular rescue they have the power to make them comply. I do recognise that PR are making things easier for the pounds but that doesn't mean they can't be chased up to make PR comply with their terms and conditions of taking dogs from the pounds. The reason it hasn't been sorted before now is that it will take a lot of time and energy and also that some people get harassed pretty seriously. It's not an easy job but it's not impossible.

IMO BCC. If they are not able to BA the dog they had better make sure the dog goes to a reputable rescue who has the finances, ability and commitment to work through assesments and rehabilitation. Both BCC and HP have enough info and experience to know that PR's will not meet any of the essential requirements. Then that is down to the pounds. PR is simply taking advantage of them not doing their jobs properly. So, my question is, why aren't the pounds being smacked around for allowing DA dogs to be released? No, it all comes down to council. Re your last comment; it is council allowing RTRO dogs going to knowingly an unreputable group. So if we push for laws who and how will they determine which group is or is not reputable unless we also have laws to cover what comes next We don't have to push for laws, we just have to push for PR to comply with their existing conditions and the councils they deal with to enforce it. New laws aren't needed.

I was looking at her and couldn't figure out if she was truly RTRO or someone got that wrong. I can see a dog without a RTRO condition is on both as if not adopted directly could be taken by rescue. But common sense says RTRO dogs should only be under the rescue tab.

If the existing requirements were actually followed up then there would be no need for rescue regulation. But really PR are a lawsuit away from bringing down all rescue. Pounds seem to be playing their part though by letting things slide when they should be chasing up paperwork. The dogs that are RTRO are the ones that are listed on the rescue tab and not also on the adoption tab right on the Blacktown site? I might have to pm you Nic.