Are You Serious Jo

How is Grace going?

Probably have to have a property inspection to get the permit. The other states aren't looking good for breeders so I am not optimistic. Puppy farms will be able to afford the fees and be able to build kennels, small breeders are probably out of luck.

ID is the important bit because anyone can buy a vest off the net. I'd have a few cards in different languages stating the act under which you are allowed entry.

Then why do the cat, horse, poultry and other animal people I talk to have the same opinion? I was actually surprised about the number of non DOL people who think the same about the rspca. If you actually spoke to people who breed and show other types of animals you'll find the same anti-rspca attitude. I also know a number of people who don't breed or show that have had negative experiences with them as well, and they aren't on DOL being brainwashed by us. So sorry, you are wrong. Maybe you are too young to remember the first inklings of trouble with them, there was a very good four corners episode a while back exposing a lot of rot within, and things haven't changed much since then.

True, had my mind stuck on council and forgot it was a state thing (territory). So does the constitution override the state in the same way it overrides the council by laws? I would assume it does, but harder to fight?

I think the biggest hurdle to a challenge based on the constitution is funds, the council obviously have a larger budget that the average breeder. Would be good to have a clear document outlining what councils can and can't do, as they do as they damn well please now and we all have to basically comply.

The best way to find out if they are answerable to anyone is to try to make a complaint about them. I know it sounds outlandish and there is one rspca apologist who thinks they answer to the minister but it doesn't work. Some very good legal minds have investigated this thoroughly and I believe them, they know what they are doing and had no luck.

There was a post about this somewhere on one of the two threads, but from what I gather there isn't quarantine.

No, because it makes council reluctant to work with rescue once they get burnt too many times. If they continue to supply a rescue that doesn't do the right thing it reflects badly on the council. I would have thought the chain of consequences would be bleeding obvious

The place is a shop, not sure how big though, but not huge. Isn't one of the things people don't like about pet shops is that the animals are kept in overcrowded conditions in small cages? Since PH were pinged for too many animals how is that any better than a pet shop? The fast turn over is also a concern. From what I have read from the people who do know the place from the inside it's like a pet shop for pound animals, get them in, keep vet costs down and sell fast. If you replaced the word rescue with breeder or pet shop I wonder how many people who still be supporting them blindly?

They do have more power than the police and they are answerable to no one. If they wanted to truly stop the unwanted dogs and cats they would implement low cost desexing. The main reason a lot of people don't get their pets done is cost, they say so. In a lot of shelters they already have the infrastructure to allow the public to drop animals off for desexing and I know how much the materials are that are used I looked them up. Looking forward to JB's number crunching though.

The thing is they are actually a big business, but also get charity status. They are pretty unique in Australia, they also get more power than the police and can regulate other businesses they compete with. Their staff do deserve to be better paid, no question, but I wouldn't be so tolerant if I were employed by them.

Knowledge can be gained from reading the financial reports too you know. If you are unhappy about the amount of dollars flowing down from above then take it up with them. The money is certainly there, but as it is a business they'll pay you as little as you will tolerate, and use the animals to do so.

I did read on FB yesterday that they were asking people to keep foster animal information hidden, before making accusations some people should really check their facts.

Ouch, that is a lot over their allowed numbers.

All you have to do is include the words rescue and save and people forget to think. PH themselves said they ignored the warnings, why are they surprised that this happened?

Please don't try the poor broke RSPCA trip. Great isn't it Wazzat?? Crisovar - you have in depth knowledge do you? Or are you following the general hearsay and gossip circles that say otherwise? When you have been on the inside and worked for them, when you have endlessly cut corners and your family have gone without due to low wages so you can keep trying to help animals each day, then you can speak of how much money they have. When you have seen the admin staff scrounging to pay the salary bill each fortnight, and have personally pleaded with business owners for another couple of weeks to pay animal food bills, then you can speak of how much money they have. When you have donated endless hours of your own time - unpaid, and been so tired you think you can't even stand yet turn up the next day and start cleaning, feeding and medicating all over again because you can't afford to put on any more staff but the animals are needy, then you can talk of how much money they have. There is always multiple sides to arguments. The view is very different from the inside. Don't believe gossip... I'll get off my soapbox now. You should have have asked for some of those millions to be released from the bank then. It's not gossip, you just have to look at their annual reports.

Shortstep is being sarcastic, not to be taken seriously.

Once again it is a case of people confusing cruelty with human emotion, they feel bad about it and for some reason their brain isn't working and they turn it into something cruel. But will be interesting to see if anyone can actually identify the cruel aspect is supposed to be. Do they think that there are members of the dog's family out there crying their eyes out because they know their relative was PTS? Do they think the dog has a soul and as it dies it is looking down on the surgery and will be forever tormented by its death? It defies logic to me and offends my deep Vulcan sensabilities Of course no one wants to see pounds full of unwanted dogs and knowing they are getting the green dream, but being cruel??

Have you read the thread, specifically where it is stated that human doctors do practice on live animals, it blows your theory out the water I'm afraid. If putting an animal under a GA is so cruel then how do those opposed to it cope with their pets being desexed, exactly the same procedure. Does that make you cruel?

This is really disturbing. What was on the video is NOT what goes on at dog shows, it is an exception to the rule. I really hope this isn't going to become the next PDE, and your comments are not helping PW. That judge was not conforming to expectations, I'm sorry but I find your comment to be offensive to every judge who doesn't do this, which is the vast majority of them. You may have an axe to grind with the show world but please don't try to take innocent people down with it.

NW has a cult like following, just drink the koolaid dammit people :)

Oh dear.. Moselle do you understand the difference between a "firm opinion" and the LAW? You are missing the point Xavier. Do you understand that there is no law that forces people who no longer want to keep a dog to hand the dog over to the pound? A person has all the rights in the world to rehome a dog to whomever they wish and if the OP has the paperwork as proof that the dog was rehomed with him/her....THE LAW HAS NOT BEEN BROKEN. Ummm, there is no paperwork of ownership, what are you talking about? The law has been broken because someone found something then decided to keep it, by law you are not able to do that. "The dog was abandoned at a friends neighbors house. They had moved and the dog was left there for 3 days without food or shelter. So I took her home..." AND NOW you....don't just cut and paste whatever suits you....why don't you quote the bits where I constantly emphasised that the OP should approach the former owner and ask for her to sign over ownership of the dog! I was asking about this bit because it seems a bit random and I have no idea what you are talking about in the context of this thread. I think I'll back away slowly now and careful not to make eye contact

Oh dear.. Moselle do you understand the difference between a "firm opinion" and the LAW? You are missing the point Xavier. Do you understand that there is no law that forces people who no longer want to keep a dog to hand the dog over to the pound? A person has all the rights in the world to rehome a dog to whomever they wish and if the OP has the paperwork as proof that the dog was rehomed with him/her....THE LAW HAS NOT BEEN BROKEN. Ummm, there is no paperwork of ownership, what are you talking about? The law has been broken because someone found something then decided to keep it, by law you are not able to do that. "The dog was abandoned at a friends neighbors house. They had moved and the dog was left there for 3 days without food or shelter. So I took her home..."

I was just reading about some research that regular fish oil is harmful to humans, I'll see if I can find it again.