Steve

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?

Malti small rescues can have an opinion but that doesn't mean that others automatically get why they have that opinion or that their opinion shouldn't be challenged. This was put in the public arena and it as an opinion - it doesnt become not allowed to have an opinion when everyone reading it or commenting doesnt agree with you. Why should I not be able to have an opinion because Im not a rescue group large or small? I was the one told to go away and stop posting not any small rescue group trying to give an opinion! Ive seen posts that are telling me that PR are taking money under false pretences well I just don't get why if that is really how the posters feel that they don't do something about that or at least explain why they dont or dont want to - Its free to lodge a complaint and have it looked at and they may be right . I don't mean that to be condescending or anything else but these are serious accusations which are close to defamatory and if its happening then it should be stopped. I also don't get why here its beat up PR but still use their site and also link to their PR site on your facebook page. I can see how it saves lives because it enables rescue groups to be able to access those trying to find an animal easier than you can without them. I have no issue with that. Have you approached them to ask them to clarify?

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.

Yes

So go back a while - the only thing I knew about rescue was that if people didn't take dogs they would be killed. For a while I couldn't understand why things I saw happening in private rescue were happening. Why were private rescue wanting to make it harder for people to take home one of their dogs, why were they so keen on testing temperament,ensuring they weren't incubating disease or have health issues etc? After all wasn't the goal to get as many out alive as possible? Ive watched how the different philosophies ,people and groups work ,Ive seen P Rounds in action and listened to the critics .Ive taken note of stats from a big rescue org who brag about numbers placed and see that about 43% of dogs they know of that they place bounce back either to them or other rescue groups. Ive had meetings with people and groups from both sides of the fence and I understand that there will always be some who simply want everything saved,get em a new home no support not much testing etc and others who want to be sure that only well temperaments ,healthy dogs which are well suited to the placement go out and who offer post placement support etc. I understand that some people , some families can live with any dog even if it comes in as one thing and ends up another but that's not me. I don't want a dog that is what I consider high risk because it hasn't been tested and would need me and my family to change what we do and how we do it. The idea a dog would come from rescue and hurt a child or another animal,worrying about it more than I can enjoy its company when that could be avoided scares me. I dont really quite understand how most people and certainly most families would take such things under consideration or how they can be more sure of what they are getting if they don't go through a private rescue which is operating with integrity. There are several assumptions in this push for more placements to made straight from the pounds. The stats above are used to push this campaign but could just as easily be used to prop up other potential solutions such as changes to traditional methods of set up and running private rescue groups. wages for administrators and foster carers etc. As I said earlier there is probably room for both and those taking a dog directly from a pound is a different target market to someone who prefers less risk. Much depends on what comes next in how pounds are expected to manage this and move them out. Recently I had a call from a woman distressed because council had given her 14 days to get her dogs off her property - council laws in her state said 2 dogs and she had 15 .She felt this was very unfair as they were all small rescue dogs which she had saved - 10 of which she got from Blacktown pound. How will this sort of thing be prevented are questions I would be interested in seeing. There has been a lot of great work done to promote the idea that taking a rescue dog is a good viable alternative when looking for a family pet so Id hope that part of what pounds will do is lower the risks.

Now you're just getting condescending. I suggest as someone who has other things to do that don't involve rescuing, your time would be better spent elsewhere than perpetually going around in circles. I didn't mean to be condescending please accept my apologies if that's how I sounded and thank you for your rather rude advice but for your information much of what we do does involve rescue and it certainly does involve understanding current issues which affect our rescue and foster carer members. For the record On a daily basis part of what I do involves rescue including looking after the rescue dogs I have here and speaking to and meeting with hundreds of people involved in rescue and foster care each year. I am fully aware of what you do. Im not interested in public tit for tat and find it hard to understand why you would say what you did if you were fully aware of what I do these days. Ive taken your advice on board apologised if I sounded condescending and prefer to stay on topic and not have to feel I need to defend why I come here or why I wanted to understand what you see as a problem.

Now you're just getting condescending. I suggest as someone who has other things to do that don't involve rescuing, your time would be better spent elsewhere than perpetually going around in circles. I didn't mean to be condescending please accept my apologies if that's how I sounded and thank you for your rather rude advice but for your information much of what we do does involve rescue and it certainly does involve understanding current issues which affect our rescue and foster carer members. For the record On a daily basis part of what I do involves rescue including looking after the rescue dogs I have here and speaking to and meeting with hundreds of people involved in rescue and foster care each year.

Im hearing you and Im trying to see it from both points of view. The 60,000 and only X amount of sign up isnt counted because thats an ongoing thing and if it goes anywhere its going to take years. I cant understand if you are so convinced they are taking donations under any kind of false pretence why you don't report them and have it looked at I would have thought small rescue would be more concerned about other things they are doing.

According to info Ive received The RSPCA raided her years ago but she came up clean.She was suspended by the ANKC but that was because she didnt submit paper work to explain when it was demanded not because of her treatment of her dogs The photos of her property in the media recently were 10 years old. It would be pretty easy to have some minor breaches of the code if they got picky with that many dogs and we dont know how serious they were. The photo of the dog in poor condition was one of the neighbours dogs - it just smells a bit and I still dont think the RSPCA should make public statements and give details when its in such an early phase.

Yes. Diane Knight Knightbridge Kennels . But as is usually the case there is a lot going on here which is not true and has been mixed up into one to make it sound worse and sensationalised and exaggerated. I expect crap from animal rights but Personally I think the RSPCA comments were way out of line and I question their motives and ethics and their lack of confidentiality in discussing things like this before any one is charged or found guilty Im all for making people accountable but the way this has been done and reported doesnt seem very fair to me.

If I have to engage a trainer or radically change how I live and how my family lives I want to know BEFORE I decide to take the dog and I dont want to take a dog in that needs thousands in health bills or nursing .Sounds terrible I know but that the way it is for me and I dont think Im in the minority. There could be enough good rescuers with good resources its just that this is the focus on how to fix the problem there are other alternatives including the one that Mita just referenced. This entire program came about because it has been decided that private rescue cant double what their contribution is.I think they can if they get the right kind of support and help.

Far as Im aware there have been no charges .There were some directions to comply with things in the code but nothing more.

Yes Ive had these thoughts as well. You would hope that part of the plan is to have them providing such information to people who buy their dogs and the Consumer laws should mean that if the dog does need things such as dental treatment that this should be disclosed prior to someone handing over their money. I would also hope that there is some pretty sophisticated behaviour and temp testing on every dog and that those considering taking them have full disclosure about the good and the bad. For me it seems that there has to be a different target market to those that private rescue are aiming to service and attract. Its challenging for me to see how Petrescue can continue to do what they have done as effectively for the private rescue groups if they are promoting bypassing them and taking dogs straight form the pound. It seems that the goal is for private rescue to have an exit plan which entails the demand for what they do being lessened and no longer a need for them to continue. I would expect that some groups that go the extra mile and register an ABN, and apply and go through the pain of attaining charity status would have at least some idea that they want to be in it for the longer haul and build a viable rescue group and the long term goal of this program that Im getting via the video seems to be that placement of dogs from pounds would over take much of what those 800 groups do so the exit plan is to make them obsolete and no longer needed or at least needed considerably less. Dont get me wrong I do think that both systems can operate and share the market place into the future.I do think pounds should pull their act together and I think if private rescue have good business and management plans and if they go pretty hard at promoting more what they do and go after attracting people who do want their dogs assessed via living in a foster home etc and how that is different and why they can thrive. If we are politically correct we would say well doesn't matter the aim is to save more animals and there is some kind of badge of honour to rescue people being poverty stricken but ......................

Powerlegs animal care donations were to me the donations they asked for to look after a litter of kittens etc I beleive that was a once only thing and they dont do that often if they do it at all now. To me donations to support Petrescue made via their website are not in any way animal care donations. PR have operated on donations and not just corporate sponsorship since day one. Im sorry I can see how passionate you are about this and I'm trying to understand but I just cant see how private rescue are doing them any favours without ample reward. Clearly you are getting enquiries through - many of which lead to placement of animals and you have the ability to use them to promote your rescue which you wouldn't have if you didn't use them.If people didnt feel they were getting reward for using their site they would stop doing it even though you are getting the ability to do these things for free. No one is saying that because some rescue groups dont have enough money to remunerate themselves that they are worthless and without right to question but any rescue group could have enough money to remunerate themselves with a revised business and management model. I cant see how PR are taking money that you or any other rescue would get if they didn't get it or why they shouldn't ask and receive donations.

Thanks Shel. Makes it simple to understand where its all coming from and it appears to be one potential way to reduce animals being killed. Its way past time that pounds and shelters cleaned up their act and did more for finding homes but I do think it makes some generic assumptions that I don't necessarily agree with and Id like to tease out some potential unintended consequences before I fully supported it. Id be interested to see more of part two and three and the expected levels of service and management. Whilst I agree that private rescue has developed as a cottage industry and the only motivation for some who have become involved is to save dogs and cats,that some would be interested in an exit plan I would like to think that this area of canine welfare is evolving,that more are interested in taking it out of the cottage industry area and that many would like to more than double their contribution and build viable sustainable businesses with plans for being able to have as their exit plan being able to hand over a viable charity which fulfils its purpose of saving animals but also provides excellent income for those who work in it or selling a profitable private business when they are ready to retire.

I also doubt that Petrescue would be eligible for such grants - Pacers was not when we were in that space.

If anyone is interested Ive got a stock take sale on Calendula Flowers [Organic] $4 for 50g

Yes but some of the worst are not doing much more than taking them straight out of the pound and sending them all over the place non temperament checked or assessed etc I would consider these the bad rescue. I would also consider dogs being shipped out straight from pounds with limited checks and time taken to test the dogs to be a step backward and potentially more problems being faced by those taking them on. To me it seems to jeopodise a lot of the work done to promote rescue who do tick all the boxes and give people more confidence that taking a rescue dog is not risky.

Im curious to know what you guys think of the Pet rescue campaign to place animals straight from pounds. I know part of the blurb is that without this saving animals is not sustainable and more will die but it worries me a tad and I don't agree that this was the best answer.

Most people don't see it as sourcing income off the backs of rescue. They provide a legitimate service for rescue groups giving them access to free advertising, resources, putting a higher focus on rescue generally and they provide a good resource for people who want to find a rescue dog. They don't charge for rescue to use their website ,their forms or other resources etc but do ask for donations from those who think the service they provide is worthy of receiving a donation to help pay for running costs required for being able to produce the service as well as and as effectively as they have. They could do just as well by working less outside of the website provision as that is where most of the income is coming from and they could easily have set up as a private business and simply taken all of the profits for themselves. The money they put back into projects and promotion of rescue etc is voluntary and a massive amount of full time and part time work and its the rescue world which have 100% been the beneficiaries of that. The only difference is that donations over $2 would not be tax deductible. Most websites actually provide a free advertising service for a short time until they build their presence and website profile and then charge those who want to continue using their services.These guys haven't done that . Foster Carers They provide lots of articles in their library for anyone considering foster caring and any search for foster carer takes you to their website. For a lot of people thinking about having a go its the first port of call. From their website. How do I get started? Go to PetRescue.com.au, select Dog, Cat or Other Pets, select size and state, then click ‘Show advanced search’ and select ‘Pets looking for foster care’. If you find a pet you’d like to enquire about and offer your services as a foster carer, click the ‘Enquire about this pet’ button at the top of the pet’s profile, or scroll to the bottom of the profile page to find the contact details of the rescue group caring for the pet. Alternatively, contact [email protected] and we’ll help connect you with a rescue group in your area. We've also launched our Workplace Foster Care Program, to encourage Australian businesses to unleash the life-saving power of the workplace. For all the info you need to convince your staff or boss that this is a pawsitively brilliant idea for your business, download the FREE guide to our Workplace Foster Care Program here.

I agree with Maddy. There are some great rescue groups around who do actually take extreme care to assess the dog and ensure that only great dogs go to families best suited to them. There is a campaign to push for dogs to be sent home straight from pounds but I would look for a group that has the dogs in a home setting for a while so they really get to know it and test it under all sorts of situations and stimuli.

If you go here you can click on 2015 financials and what they get in - how they get it and what they do with it Pre Michelle leaving is all spelled out My link If you go here you will see their total of grants received is NIL. My link Interesting to note that they list their beneficiaries as 780 rescue groups but also say they do not operate in NT or NSW.

I agree these types of things you have used as examples would be unavoidable but If I have to leave my dog in a kennel where its a high risk tick area for a couple of weeks I dont believe its unreasonable to expect the dogs are checked daily for ticks Id be more than happy to pay extra to be sure that was happening If they were being checked daily and still got a tick fair enough but personally to tell me that my dog wont be checked , its a high risk area and time of year and if it gets one and its not picked up before its a serious life and death situation its not the kennel's responsibility means I wouldn't leave my dog there. I agree that in a tick risk area they should be checked. To not do so is negligence. If a dog does have a tick issue and you have checked and done your best different issue. I wouldn't leave my dog there either. We live in an area with lots of snakes. I have done and do everything I can to keep snakes out of my kennel area. I have spent substantial amounts of money to snake proof it as well as I can. If a snake does get in and bites a dog/dogs who should pay for that? Of course you shouldn't pay if a snake bites the dog but I still say if Im leaving my dog in a high tick risk area I expect that the staff check dogs every day .When this kennel was asked about this they told me that I was being ridiculous as they had over a hundred dogs in and it was not possible of practical to put hands on all of them.

I agree these types of things you have used as examples would be unavoidable but If I have to leave my dog in a kennel where its a high risk tick area for a couple of weeks I dont believe its unreasonable to expect the dogs are checked daily for ticks Id be more than happy to pay extra to be sure that was happening If they were being checked daily and still got a tick fair enough but personally to tell me that my dog wont be checked , its a high risk area and time of year and if it gets one and its not picked up before its a serious life and death situation its not the kennel's responsibility means I wouldn't leave my dog there.

Yep we bumped into this a couple of years ago.Owner put her dogs into a big name kennel in sydney and one of her dogs almost died from a tick - the bill was over $4000 with vetting and her other little dog had also been attacked by another dog and had a smaller vet bill which she didnt have the money to pay so they wouldn't let her take them home - wouldn't allow her to make an agreement to pay the bill off so each day the bill was climbing higher. So she went in to visit them and walked out with them. Got really messy. She came to us for help and it was the first time Id really studied a boarding contract and took a closer look at how some of the big ones operate. They are in a tick area but never put their hands on the dogs to check them and if the dog gets a tick not their problem. I wouldnt leave mine with them in a fit.