Robbi Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 (edited) Why would you assume that they would actively seek to euthanize these animals? I know there are issues within the organisation and plenty of people here have had poor experiences with their local rspca, but to suggest that they would actually prefer to PTS rather than adopt out adoptable dogs is ridiculous. The sad fact is that because of the conditions some of these dogs have been kept in, many may well not be adoptable. And I know exactly where to place the blame for that However, the RSPCA shelter at Fairfield have very committed foster and behaviour/training staff who will actually be trying to achieve the best for the animals. They will try and get as many of them as possible into foster care, the puppies in particular. The dogs that stay in the shelter will also get one-on-one attention from staff. If any of the dogs in foster care demonstrate behavioural issues then foster carers are able to get one-on-one assistance from one of the shelter's trainers. If they are not too ill and/or don't have serious behaviour issues, there isn't any reason many of them won't find homes. In response to some posts questioning the involvement of Biosecurity Queensland taking the lead on the raid, and in previous dealings with the dogs' owners, I understand it is because of where they are located geographically - it gives QPIF primary responsibility. I make my assumption due to the simple reasoning that the sudden influx of dogs looking for homes in an already flooded market (for want of a better word) means that not all will be rehomed, I am sure that even if the rspca has the best intentions in the world for these dogs they will not be able to find them all homes and they cant keep them for an infinite period of time due to as much as anything else financial constraints. I wasn't intimating at any conspiracy by the rspca to put down healthy rehomeable dogs as as I hope they would never do such a thing and you also seem very confident that that wouldn't be the case. Edited September 12, 2009 by Robbi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kissindra Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 just wanted to point out this bit of the article I just linked to on the previous page: "Dr Symons said Biosecurity Queensland was paying for the upkeep of the animals until any court proceedings were finalised." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Will the rspca start quietly euthanasing some once the court case is over and the media loses interest or will they declare the majority are unsuitable for rehoming and the only think to do is pts, I despair it wont be a rosy outcome for many of the poor guys Why would you assume that they would actively seek to euthanize these animals? I know there are issues within the organisation and plenty of people here have had poor experiences with their local rspca, but to suggest that they would actually prefer to PTS rather than adopt out adoptable dogs is ridiculous. Perhaps Robbi - and a lot of other people - assumed that because of the outcome of numerous similar past cases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asalei Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 I'm pretty sure this is one of the puppy farms that brings dogs into a house at Brisbane that is solely rented for these people to sell dogs at on weekends. What ever dogs they don't sell on weekends are dropped at a local pet shop. Aboslutely disgusting. Nice to know they are being dealt with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 If there are court proceedings, the RSPCA is supposed to keep all the animals until the outcome of the case. Yes, I know that hasn't always happened in the past (Rozzi). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kissindra Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 (edited) The case is actually BioSecurity's, as I understand it and as I've been told by a staff member, the RSPCA are merely helping out with care of the animals, which does not take jurisdiction away from BioSec. Edited September 12, 2009 by Kissindra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 just wanted to point out this bit of the article I just linked to on the previous page:"Dr Symons said Biosecurity Queensland was paying for the upkeep of the animals until any court proceedings were finalised." If Biosecurity is paying for the upkeep, why is the RSPCA soliciting donations for their upkeep? Why are they not informing the public that Biosecurity is paying for the upkeep. Why is the RSPCA asking for donatons of food and whelping boxes etc, when they intend fostering out as many dogs as possible? Why are they allowing pregnant bitches to whelp, and will probably sell yet more pups without health tests and dodgyy ancestryy? They can't home the dogs in the pound now, why produce more? And as ever, the "purebred" pups will sell before the pound dogs, so more pound dogs will be pts. Why are the bitches not being speyed now? Although that may affect the court case. Why are bitches being allowed to raise pups in a stressful and potentially hazardous to the pups' health environment. Kissindra, I know you are trying to do the right thing for these poor dogs, and that's wonderful. I know you don't know the answers. Maybe someone does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Is this the one that has a vet delivering the pups to a house in the Mt Gravatt area and fills a pet shop there? That one has papered as well as not papered dogs and I know first hand what appalling condition some of those pups arrive in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Is this the one that has a vet delivering the pups to a house in the Mt Gravatt area and fills a pet shop there? That one has papered as well as not papered dogs and I know first hand what appalling condition some of those pups arrive in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iffykharma Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 just wanted to point out this bit of the article I just linked to on the previous page:"Dr Symons said Biosecurity Queensland was paying for the upkeep of the animals until any court proceedings were finalised." If Biosecurity is paying for the upkeep, why is the RSPCA soliciting donations for their upkeep? Why are they not informing the public that Biosecurity is paying for the upkeep. Why is the RSPCA asking for donatons of food and whelping boxes etc, when they intend fostering out as many dogs as possible? Why are they allowing pregnant bitches to whelp, and will probably sell yet more pups without health tests and dodgyy ancestryy? They can't home the dogs in the pound now, why produce more? And as ever, the "purebred" pups will sell before the pound dogs, so more pound dogs will be pts. Why are the bitches not being speyed now? Although that may affect the court case. Why are bitches being allowed to raise pups in a stressful and potentially hazardous to the pups' health environment. Kissindra, I know you are trying to do the right thing for these poor dogs, and that's wonderful. I know you don't know the answers. Maybe someone does. I don't know the answers to these questions either Jed, except that they don't own the dogs and if they can't desex the animals then they sure as hell can't abort litters - they are technically someone else's "property". It can take time to organise foster care, particularly for these numbers, and as another poster mentioned, bitches were dropping pups on arrival - where else are they supposed to keep these animals until alternative and appropriate care can be arranged? Maybe things are not as cut and dried as the newspaper reports? - or do we all believe that everything reported is accurate? Maybe because they've had the animals for all of 2 or 3 days they can't get the supplies any other way? Maybe Maybe Maybe. Maybe you could contact the RSPCA and ask these questions and let us know? And I know I harp on this constantly, but the Rozzie situation was caused by a different organisation, RSPCA NSW. If people have other examples of where RSPCA Qld has done a seizure of this kind and quietly euthanized the lot I'd would be very interested to know of it. I can only form a well-informed opinion if I'm well informed. PM is fine if its not appropriate to post on an open board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldchow Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 I'd say youre' right Steve, he's the cheapest vet in town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 I would hope that the RSPCA would contact breed clubs/breed rescue or failing those, registered breeders for assistance for the purebreds. A recent example of where this didn't happen passed onto me makes it a forlorn hope. It was third hand and unconfirmable so I can't post it here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueAussie Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 People in Qld can only hope that RSPCA Qld now has to abide by the signed Agreement between what was DPI & F Qld (now Biosecurity Qld) & RSPCA Qld (1 July 2007). I'll see if I can find a link to this agreement if anyone's interested in it. After some recent cases it seems the DPI & F Qld has stepped in & enforced the Agreement. The RSPCA Qld will (hopefully) be held accountable for its actions under the watchful eye of the now Biosecurity Qld. Other points to note are: 1. RSPCA Qld has been known to allow "Blacktag" animals (those on hold pending outcomes of court cases) breed whilst in "care". This does not include puppies that have been born to already pregnant bitches after they've arrived at the RSPCA Qld "shelter". Puppies from these litters seem to just "disappear" or are not ultimately accounted for. 2. Blacktag animals that are on hold in foster care whilst awaiting the outcome of court cases must not be desexed. This does not mean they're not bred whilst they're being fostered. How does the owner of the animals know if, when or how many times their animal has had litter/s if the animals have been held for an extended period of time? 3. It's a matter of record that RSPCA Qld has taken it upon themselves to euthanase large numbers of animals days after they've been seized. This is even before the matter has been heard in court & a Magistrate has had the opportunity to rule on the case. The RSPCA Qld's reason in one case was that they didn't have the "resources" to care for the animals!! The animals didn't even have a chance !! 4. Another instance is where a puppy was euthanased on the spot right in front of the owner, before the owner was given the opportunity to have an independant Veterinary assessment undertaken. It broke the owner's heart to actually be present when this happened & is something they will never forget. Surely only a Magistrate has the right to decide the fate of an animal in this case? The puppy was not malnourished, neglected, or in imminent danger. It was not suffering. The Qld public can only hope now that the days of the RSPCA Qld not being held accountable for their actions are over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iffykharma Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 name='TrueBlueAussie' date='13th Sep 2009 - 11:59 AM' post='3971296']People in Qld can only hope that RSPCA Qld now has to abide by the signed Agreement between what was DPI & F Qld (now Biosecurity Qld) & RSPCA Qld (1 July 2007). I'll see if I can find a link to this agreement if anyone's interested in it. After some recent cases it seems the DPI & F Qld has stepped in & enforced the Agreement. The RSPCA Qld will (hopefully) be held accountable for its actions under the watchful eye of the now Biosecurity Qld. I'd be very interested, thank you. And a minor correction, Biosecurity Queensland is just one arm of QPI&F, which still exists as part of the new Dept of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation. They look after a variety of things including introduced pest and things like Equine Influenza and Hendra Virus. They've been around for a while. Other points to note are:1. RSPCA Qld has been known to allow "Blacktag" animals (those on hold pending outcomes of court cases) breed whilst in "care". This does not include puppies that have been born to already pregnant bitches after they've arrived at the RSPCA Qld "shelter". Puppies from these litters seem to just "disappear" or are not ultimately accounted for. 2. Blacktag animals that are on hold in foster care whilst awaiting the outcome of court cases must not be desexed. This does not mean they're not bred whilst they're being fostered. How does the owner of the animals know if, when or how many times their animal has had litter/s if the animals have been held for an extended period of time? 3. It's a matter of record that RSPCA Qld has taken it upon themselves to euthanase large numbers of animals days after they've been seized. This is even before the matter has been heard in court & a Magistrate has had the opportunity to rule on the case. The RSPCA Qld's reason in one case was that they didn't have the "resources" to care for the animals!! The animals didn't even have a chance !! 4. Another instance is where a puppy was euthanased on the spot right in front of the owner, before the owner was given the opportunity to have an independant Veterinary assessment undertaken. It broke the owner's heart to actually be present when this happened & is something they will never forget. Surely only a Magistrate has the right to decide the fate of an animal in this case? The puppy was not malnourished, neglected, or in imminent danger. It was not suffering. Can you cite particular examples? In the cases where breeding has occurred, has this been in foster care, in the shelter or both? Did the puppies just "disappear" or were you just not able to find out what happened to them? You're implying the dogs were bred on purpose. What evidence do you have that they weren't accidental matings? I understand this can happen to the most experienced and careful of breeders. With regard to point three in particular - can you point me to the "record". Is it newspaper reports, court decisions, hansard, or are we talking about the ramblings of people with too much time on their hands and access to web page creation software. Sorry, I don't mean to sound snarky, but some of what passes for "record" is highly dubious. Do you have first hand knowledge of what happened in these cases and what the reason for euthanasia was? As for the last point, that's truely horrible and there's no excuse for it. It's hard to believe there isn't more to it though. The Qld public can only hope now that the days of the RSPCA Qld not being held accountable for their actions are over. My understanding is that the reason QPIF have jurisdiction in this case is the geographical location of the property - that's how they divvy up which group looks after what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guardienne Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 Figures from RSPCA QLD annual report 2007-2008 Puppies and dogs reclaimed by their owners 4150 Puppies and dogs adopted 5152 Puppies and dogs euthanised 6962 More killed than rehomed....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greytmate Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Sheridan the RSPCA did contact other groups for help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casowner Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 You got to love breeders of "shitzus" and the rare "golden labrador". seriously shouldn't you be able to spell the breed correctly and get the colour right, or is gold the new yellow and I have been living in a cave, and don't forget the "easy care" poodles. Sarcasm is coming out of me tonight, I'm sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Sheridan the RSPCA did contact other groups for help. Yes, for donations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greytmate Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Sheridan the RSPCA did contact other groups for help. Yes, for donations. They didn't ask us for any money. They wanted our practical assistance. We lent them an 8 berth trailer to help get all the dogs down from Wondai to the shelter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavalblaze Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 Sheridan the RSPCA did contact other groups for help. Yes, for donations. They didn't ask us for any money. They wanted our practical assistance. We lent them an 8 berth trailer to help get all the dogs down from Wondai to the shelter. I've donated 50 brand new collars to the shelter. They are going to need extra supplies to be able cope with such a large number of dogs. I'm guttered to see such shameful breeding program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now