Steve

So even though its been announced as a done deal it still has to get through parliament - bet there are a lot of MP'S who are being challenged by their constituents especially in rural areas Reminds me of Clover Moore's bill - she was pretty confident too about it getting through Its nowhere near a done deal yet I reckon that after watching this that everyone who has a breed that has a brachy head should consider the same could happen to the legality of breeding them because almost the same arguments can be used if they want to and its definitely on the agenda.

Would seem to me based on current criteria that they are in fact doing charitable work My link

There's just no end to the money grabbing behaviour now. Bequests are a great idea. Not everyone has relatives to leave money to and, even if they do, they might want to support a charitable cause. More rescues should do this. Is Pet Rescue a charity? I thought it was a business? Its a company limited by guarantee and has charity status . Have to admit the fact they have charity status did surprise me as when we were doing PACERS and applied as a charity we were knocked back as they thought we were not actually physically looking after animals which we were so we won on appeal but hard to see how pet rescue fit the criteria for an animal welfare charity My link

Not to mention a lot of families where no one is home most of the time, and a lot of kids who would rather be in front of a screen than behind a leash. And very little active/social promotion of dog ownership aimed at the general population, .or out side of a dwindling K.C membership. Here in Aus. anyway Not sure Id agree with this the MDBA have members coming in every day. In the last month we have had over 100 new members and right now we have a pile a mile high that we haven't counted waiting for approval.

There are many things that happen in the dog world I don't agree with. The reality is that whether some agree or disagree the decision isn't their's to make. For every one person who thinks its better to do something one way or the other there is one that shouts louder to say "no way" and has a good go at bullying the other to doing what they think should be done. If someone owns a dog whether that's a rescue person or not they get to make decisions based on what THEY think is what is best for the dog as long as they remain within the codes and laws. In NSW there is no requirement for a rescue to only keep a dog for a specific period of time and even if the dog is in an enclosure its whole life as long as the enclosure fits the codes and sizes that's not a breach of any laws or codes They know the dogs they know the issues, they know what happens if they place it and it doesnt work out again., they have kennels approved by council and volunteers and staff so seems to me they are in a better position to decide what is best for the dog than any observer.

Government will not regulate. They have no interest in regulation. If the industry won't then it is not a viable industry. Well they are taking the money off them why dont they regulate or at least take away their self regulation and give some of the money to the RSPCA to regulate as they do every other breeder in NSW ?

I'd put my dogs down too before handing them over to places like the RSPCA. Absolutely Well being so ready to put your dogs down is the easy way out, no responsibility taken to find a solution. If the dogs' lives are so cheap then that just confirms the rightness of the decision. Disgusting attitude Dead is not suffering.

You can legislate to stop someone racing dogs ,you can try and stop them breeding for the racing industry though there is a question that will be raised about restriction of trade for the breeder and the consumer .Massive compensation payouts for those who have had approvals to do these things on their properties including devaluation of their properties and loss of livelihood etc. But unless you ban people breeding greyhounds as they have done for pitbulls then breeding them is still a legal activity, selling them, is still a legal activity and I doubt very very much that the right to have your own dogs put to sleep is ever going to be interfered with. There seems to be an assumption that this will see all the dogs surrendered but it may see more being killed so only the breeder and the vet knows what they are doing and more being sold interstate and overseas to protect bloodlines etc. Personally I think that allowing any group to be exempt from the things every other breeder is and enabling them to be self policing is asking for trouble and thats why the MDBA will not apply for the exemptions Vicdogs members have in Victoria. If they can simply call a ban on racing dogs and breeding dogs for the racing industy how long before there are bans on breeding dogs for the show ring or on various breeds of dogs? Being self governing and accepting such exemptions makes them sitting ducks.

Sounds pretty reasonable to me and nowhere near as it has been presented but no surprises there.

Banning racing might make some impact but they are still able to breed them, train them export them interstate and internationally ,keep them and travel interstate to race them and kill them when ever and as how many they want. All they needed to do to make a bigger impact was to take away the exemptions greyhound breeders get in some states so they are not self policing and are accountable as all the rest of us are. The reason given is they are not capable of ensuring these things dont happen within the industry so make them accountable as all other breeders are in NSW.

https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/Bills/55PDF/2016/AnimalProtPuppiesOLAB16.pdf My link

Has anyone asked them - why? I dont know which one this is but I have had dealings with a "rescue" who has this situation and the sad thing is that they are seen by some as heros After all they are ticking the boxes - even if it takes the whole rest of the dogs life and the dog is completely unsuitable for living with a family - including inside with theirs - they "save it" - no kill tags bring in donations And if its because no one in all this time has proven to be a worthy home they are seen to still be doing whats best for the dog. No one cares if they are chained up or locked up their whole lives as long as they are saved Its their dog once they save it after all.

We have a lovely lady who is a spinner come here periodically to pick up the Maremma fur. We get garbage bags full of it every spring. Last time she came she had a quilt made from squares of it - really nice and if you hadn't told me what it was I wouldnt have known.

Ive changed the price on the website now and no you cant over do it .

Thank you

So explain what you are saying - have I been conned by believing that its better to go through a rescue group? All of the foster carers I've met [hundreds of them] have been awesome and they have had training and support from their group admins ,they work with trainers and are highly skilled or being trained with support . To some extent, yes... with the rise in the number of pop-up "save them all at any cost" rescues in recent years, it can be pot luck picking a rescue group that does all the things necessary to have the best outcome for the dogs they "save" from the pound system. There ARE some incredible and well established rescues out there that fully support their carers and other staff (SSR, Paws, for example), but they are fast being outnumbered by those whose processes leave something to be desired. Then we have organisations like the RSPCA NSW (the original "rescue group" if you will)... who run pretty much exactly like most pounds (with the inclusion of their dodgy "temperament testing")... and Joe Public also see that model to be perfectly acceptable to source a pet from... I've also met many foster carers in my travels, and quite frankly, there have been some that I wouldn't entrust with the care of a stuffed toy... sad but true... *sigh* I stand by my observation and experience in actually being someone who has taken dogs straight from the pound for a rescue, that a good majority of dogs from said pounds would be perfectly fine adopted straight from the pound by a general member of the public. Demonising the pound system and inferring that all of the animals in them are somehow "broken" and in need of all sorts of work is just wrong. We need to re-educate the public that there ARE perfectly adoptable animals in pounds across this country... rescue cannot save them all, so pounds DO need to step up and at least make a concerted effort to have adoptable animals advertised properly so that they have the same chances as those taken in by rescue. I've been a foster carer (for more than one group), met plenty of other foster carers, and worked with the pound system to source animals for my rescue group... the reality is NOT what the PR (public relations) machine will have you believe. T. Wow - Thats that then.

Same in Victoria but no charges have been laid - so far.

Nope, I agree with you. I don't begrudge PR employees a wage when they're actually helping rescues- such as the Sensis promotions or with getting donations of pet food to rescues (assuming your rescue is in an eligible area, of course)- but some of the other recent stuff seems to be very expensive busywork. What I'd like to see is PR asking rescues how they would liked to be helped, rather than coming up with endless promotional stuff. It's great to have adoption enquiries but if I can't afford to take on new dogs because I'm completely out of resources.. it's a bit pointless. And that's not a hypothetical if, I am out of resources. And it wasn't for lack of effort on my part, either; I spent hundreds of hours trying to fundraise and came up virtually empty. If I'd worked a minimum wage job for the same period of time, I'd have made more money for the dogs and with that depressing realisation, I'm now back at school, studying to get a decent job so that in future, I can fund my rescue entirely by myself. It's one thing to say "Oh, all rescues can be financially stable if only they choose to" but my question is, how? Where is the information? Where are the resources? PR could be helping us with this but instead, they're spending the money on..? If it seems like people are getting emotional in here, it's because many of us have put so much of our own time and money into rescue and it sort of feels like PR is benefiting from it (and running well enough to pay wages) while we struggle just to keep going. Thanks Maddy I understand this. Im happy to help you with how . Give me a ring when you get a chance we have lots of resources to help you. Once I'm on holidays in a few weeks' time, I definitely will. At the moment, I'm out on placement (35 hours a week) and just don't have the actual time or energy to be trying to start anything else. This is sort of what I'm getting at though- PR have the resources to be offering real help to struggling rescues but instead, they're spending that time/money on stuff like profile makeovers that are available only to a limited few. Rescues need practical help and the biggest struggle for rescues will probably always be sourcing funds. Yes I can see that and I agree but that's nothing new or dishonest.

Nope, I agree with you. I don't begrudge PR employees a wage when they're actually helping rescues- such as the Sensis promotions or with getting donations of pet food to rescues (assuming your rescue is in an eligible area, of course)- but some of the other recent stuff seems to be very expensive busywork. What I'd like to see is PR asking rescues how they would liked to be helped, rather than coming up with endless promotional stuff. It's great to have adoption enquiries but if I can't afford to take on new dogs because I'm completely out of resources.. it's a bit pointless. And that's not a hypothetical if, I am out of resources. And it wasn't for lack of effort on my part, either; I spent hundreds of hours trying to fundraise and came up virtually empty. If I'd worked a minimum wage job for the same period of time, I'd have made more money for the dogs and with that depressing realisation, I'm now back at school, studying to get a decent job so that in future, I can fund my rescue entirely by myself. It's one thing to say "Oh, all rescues can be financially stable if only they choose to" but my question is, how? Where is the information? Where are the resources? PR could be helping us with this but instead, they're spending the money on..? If it seems like people are getting emotional in here, it's because many of us have put so much of our own time and money into rescue and it sort of feels like PR is benefiting from it (and running well enough to pay wages) while we struggle just to keep going. Thanks Maddy I understand this. Im happy to help you with how . Give me a ring when you get a chance we have lots of resources to help you.

I never implied you had any association with them! I was just unsure of how you have dismissed anyone's thoughts or views, no matter what has been shown. You stated 'I would have thought small rescue would be more concerned about other things they are doing.' Clearly putting the 'small rescue' issue in play. Honestly, this issue is not as big as you are making it out to be, but I do see the frustration at trying to show you anything, because it doesn't matter what is shown or said, you don't agree nor see how anyone could see it differently Then if you don't see a problem with things, you won't explain how you don't see it as a problem all I get is a 'ask them' (for e.g $1000 will save 100 lives, you don't have a problem with it, but won't answer how it saves 100 lives, and don't care, you just agree with the blanket statement made by PR, and that is enough for you). I don't need to ask them, I know it doesn't. Rescues have never been charged $10 per listing, so getting the public to donate that, is not correct at all. But the premise is, you are happy with what you see, and that is fine, I am not here to change your mind. Seriously? I know you never implied I had an association with them I simply made the statement so it was clear that I didnt. The comments re small rescue should still be able to have an opinion were made way before I said anything about small rescue. It wasnt me who put it in play and nothing I said was saying that anyone or any group should not have an opinion. I cant really see what the point is looks to me that you dont agree or see how anyone can see it differently to you which is what you want to tell me. Ive said why I dont think its a problem and and yes Im happy with the blanket statement and so far nothing that has been said convinces me that there is a case for them to answer. I dont think there is a case for me to answer either so Im done. Thanks anyway for keeping us updated.

Both can happen in IMO, everyone is entitled to an opinion rescue or not, and how they see things, I can't speak (or type) for others. Possilby using the website regularly though would bring those who use it, to start seeing change after change when most others would not notice. You have said you don't see that there is an obscurity, or an false pretense, so not sure why a complaint should be lodged after a thread asking what is going on and what do you think? There is clearly two different perspectives. I think we all use a social medium that we don't 100% agree with, why should people who say they see things are changing and don't necessarily agree with it all the things on it? No one would use any social medium then, would they No idea about the link, I honestly couldn't link anything together (not techno-savvy at all). You won't answer how $1000 saves 100 lives though? Nor the stats they use as being correct in being directly correlating to those figures. I guess I see it as Petrescue claims to save lives, when they are a link in the chain and they seem very happy to ignore the chain affect we all have in getting dogs to safety and that is sad, as their site is nothing without rescues, and rescues wouldn't have one central site without them. But no one else is spewing out stats to ask for funds. The error the public make in thinking PR is rescue highlights the confusion. My own personal conscience would not be happy if I was involved with that. Just my own thoughts on a situation that shouldn't be blown up to be bigger than Ben Hur, I guess I would ask, was your posts suppose to be 'The Devil's Advocate'? Because it seemed no matter what was said, nor shown to you, had an legitimacy in your view. There is no devils advocacy or hidden agenda or mystery for me.I have no association with them and the only time in the last few years Ive visited their website was due to these threads.I get that its changed but I cant see that is a bad thing. Perhaps I might if Id watched the changes. At no time did I think this is coming from a small rescue group so they shouldn't have an opinion. I am now and always have been happy to stand corrected and I often am but so far I simply dont get why it's such a big issue and it seems that Im just expected to agree in case its taken personally that Im seeing it from a different perspective. Its simple I just don't agree with some of the things that have been said I cant follow the logic or understand the anger and I think what they do is good for dogs to find homes more so than anyone or any other service has been able to. In my opinion if there really are people who are being tricked into donating to them or if they are presenting themselves as one thing and doing certain things they are not badly enough to solicit such emotion then someone should do more than chatting about it, and report them. If I could see it I would do so without hesitation. I have already said that I think that the service they provide helps to save lives and if they say $1000 saves a hundred lives I have no issue with that. Edited to add Its not up to me to answer to you about how $1000 saves lives anyway - ask them.

If you mean me Im not arguing we should maintain rather than overhaul.I just dont necessarily agree that this particular overhauling process is necessarily the best or all its cracked up to be.

I get that a heck of a lot of dogs come straight from pounds to foster homes and that a heck of a lot of them are perfectly lovely well temperamented and healthy dogs from the get go but that dosent change the fact that these dogs leave foster care with a more intense assessment How is it possible to be as sure that there is no issue or to have a better view of what type of family best suits it if you are assessing a dog in a pound setting? Don't forget that many foster carers are no more qualified in assessing dog temperaments than the Average Joe either... *grin* Highly experienced foster carers are few and far between... T. So explain what you are saying - have I been conned by believing that its better to go through a rescue group? All of the foster carers I've met [hundreds of them] have been awesome and they have had training and support from their group admins ,they work with trainers and are highly skilled or being trained with support .

So it seems Im missing something here. Is it worse for a group like Pound Rounds to move dogs out with assumption that only a tiny minority will have problems than it is for a pound to do so?

Im not interested in the adjective ethical but I would consider taking a pound dog at around the same level as taking one from a puppy farmer. Both are looking for homes for dogs already here and both could care less about the dogs they have or where they go and both carry higher risks for the new owner. This is not true of *many* pounds. Thats not true of many puppy farmers either. I'm eager to learn about this and hear how pounds which are considered to be doing the right thing in assessing, homing and supporting the people who take their animals are doing this.Are there any examples?