Andrea

They have always lead the public to believe that the funds were going to the groups and yet they never have! The button should be on the pages for Christmas this year, they have that ability and the funds.

The private registries/databases are all national databases, each of the private registries covers the whole of Australia: you pay fees to list/register your pets microchip with them. The NSW Companion Animal Register is free and only accessible by select recovery agencies in NSW, eg councils. If your pet is listed with one private registry it is the same private registry all over Australia, eg dog living in Qld on AAR database is the same if the dog was moved to Victoria, as in this instance. What I can see is that the Ranger has not found them on the NSW registry, not bothered to look elsewhere, and has released to a interstate rescue (with no Clause 16d) by adding them their microchips to the NSW registry. This does not show ownership (as the rescue seems to think is does), in this case, the dogs microchips were not looked for on any other database and the private registry dates and ownership will take effect if this goes to court. The Council Ranger was neglegent in performing his official duties to the detriment of these two dogs and their family. Heavens knows how many times this has happened before to other families who have just assumed their dogs would 'turn up' eventually because they were microchipped and their details were up to date. This was proven by the rescue being able to call the family and tell them that they werent getting their dogs back! Now in this situation, the private registry cant legally change ownership: the owners were still looking for the dogs and want them back, as the family had not been contacted by the impounding council, and they certainly hadnt surrendered them or given them up. Now add to this the fact that they had not stayed the complete impound period of 14 days, begs to be answered. Why are these dogs even in Victoria?? Effectively the 'new families' are holding stolen property!

Food for thought here...... Renee has posted on her page.... I posted a brief post on a Facebook group asking what my rights were. I received many inboxes from people of the public including some links to the pages where the dogs had been advertised by the rescue group. The posts said the dogs weren't available until the 27th of January on a pound aid page that had been posted on the 18th of January. On the All Over Staffy Rescue page they posted on their page that they arrived on the 26th of January. So .... OK they went missing on the day of their arrival on the property, which was the 12th, and they arrived in Victoria on the 26th January (Australia Day)...... my calculations say that they werent even held for the required 14 days of impound for microchipped dogs in NSW!!! they would have had two days travelling, at least from northern NSW to Victoria! where is this the right thing to do? We have to be able to trust the people in authority to be able to do things properly.... is this what we expect? It could happen to anyone. Remembering that the microchipping system is called the 'doggie phone home'! These dogs had all the requirements: microchips and up to date details and yet, they were sent onto transport early (impounded for only 12 days or less, depending on when they were impounded) and ended up in another state and in 'rescue' in the blink of an eye! Who thinks their dogs are safe now?

Regardless of whether the registries share their databases or not, if the Ranger had've gone to petaddress.com.au it would have told him which registry the animal's details were on and he as an 'official officer' would've SHOULD HAVE contacted the listed owners. This was not done and that is NOT doing his job properly. The regulation state...... 63 Owner of seized or surrendered animal to be notified (1) When a seized animal is delivered to a council pound or approved premises, the person in charge of the pound or premises is to give notice of the seizure of the animal to the person who appears (from the best endeavours of the person in charge to establish who the owner is) to be the owner of the animal. Notice of seizure need not be given if those best endeavours fail to establish the name and address of the owner of the animal. This Ranger's 'best endeavours' are obviously to only check the NSW registry? now I know that the Rangers out there are aware of how many 'other' databases are out there and I personally know many that go above and beyond to find the owners of their impounded dogs. The Victorian rescue person says that in NSW it is not 'obligatory' to check other databases, but I beg to differ as NOT TO CHECK would mean that the Rangers have not fulfilled their 'best endeavours'! How many other dogs travelling with their owners who are from interstate have gone missing while in NSW and just been rehomed because it's too hard to check with a phone call to an out of state registry? very poor attitude. I am curious though as to that pound's statistics. The Ranger had advised that these dogs would have been destroyed if not sent to the Victorian rescue? again if this pound was doing the right thing, 1) priority should be given to finding the owners of the dogs, 2) Then the regulatory holding period for that animal, 3) would be finding the dogs new owners directly from the pound and that leaves 4) where rescue is ultimately the safety net for the dogs ensuring that they are not put to sleep! From this phone call it should have been obvious to the Victorian rescue that they were holding 'stolen property'. They knew the owners and had made contact. My question would be - how was the private registry database able to change the ownership on dogs that the owners were still looking for and as they had not given permission for them to be given up and they certainly hadnt surrendered them, how were they able to change the ownership details without the old owners being contacted by the private registry????

Thanks heaps!

Livestock Guardian Dog Rescue in Australia or mine of course..... Maremma Sheepdogs in Rescue/ Companions For Life

Hi Kirislin, can you pm me the link please? Andrea

Not sure if this has been posted yet https://www.petrescue.com.au/bequests

For those of you who didnt even know what 'dog (& cat) rescue' was when petrescue started, this is my recent post of Shel's 'Saving Pets' fb page. in reference to the thread on DOL November 2014, that Powerlegs posted a link to here in the first post in this thread.... http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/260176-a-donation-button-next-to-our-dogs-on-petrescue/page__p__6589778__fromsearch__1#entry6589778 .... "You have posted above "But it can't all be one way - that they use the combined force of a united rescue community, but then keep all the revenue generated themselves?" irony here is in 2003 you joined the then forum called Ozdogrescue and asked struggling active rescuers 'how you could help?' At the time, most had no website or internet presence, so the resounding solution was a website where the smaller rescues could advertise their pets to get more exposure in a central place. At the time you said there was no personal gain for yourselves in doing this. Over the next 10 yrs, we have watched Petrescue get the bulk of donations, register themselves as a charity (under the guise to pay for one website and then to claim salaries), and Petrescue even managed to claim to rescue themselves when the still struggling self funded rescues continued to do the 'coal face' work at the benefit of Petrescue! All this time you were at the helm, were you not? The thread I posted above is you defending Petrescue's fundraising techniques to the very same self funded rescues that are listed on Petrescue! Those rescues who all the way back then in 2014, were trying to point out the unfairness of you 'keeping all the revenue generated' at Petrescue."

So essentially it was OK to take the money from the many kind hearted supporters for use by Petrescue while Shel was at the helm of it all.... and now she isnt she says it isnt right??? Seems to me she loaded the gun that shot the bullet! I wonder... is it possible that she should self fund the project like we do our rescues? and have done since she started petrescue!

As Powerlegs has posted Renbury closing has 'Nothing to do with the petition, although some would like to credit it." Actually the writing has apparently been on the wall for quite a while and it has to do with land acquistion and redevelopment of the urban sprawl. I'm also certain that when the property was originally purchased that this was known that it would inevitably eventuate, so the decision to close was probably made a very long time ago and cemented when the property was sold and transfers finalised late last year. It is my hope that the councils involved will unite and continue to use (rent) the facilities that will remain on the property as they are not directly affected, at least not in the immediate future. Thank you to all staff at Renbury for caring and taking the time to make a difference for the many animals that you have helped over the years.

The only people who risk losing body parts are the ones who are attempting to catch him when he doesnt know who you are. Otherwise, he is a smart boy who loves the families in his territory. Unfortunately I don't believe for a second they are going to do anything about it. None of the people that feed him are interested in helping him. I have personally called DAS to voice my concern after nearly hitting Franklin one day, and was just laughed off. A friend of mine's daughter who is very dog savvy was also apparently nearly bitten by him when she startled him accidentally.

Even the most well handled sociable dog has the ability to go 'feral' (especially if they escape before bonding to their new environments) AND survive, however, in Franklin's case he isnt feral, and he is being supported by the community. A dog in this situation is only going to allow trusted people near him. We regularly rescue from the ACT and surrounding areas, collecting the dogs isnt an issue.... the issue with Franklin is that he officially has an owner, which is the people who originally adopted him from DAS. So effectively he has to be impounded as a stray, it isnt a case of catch him and give him away.

and I for one are very happy that everyone recognises that he is NOT a threat, he is in his own territory and the people are looking out for him! What a community!

these two links to youtube will give you the general idea