Another Rspca Cock Up!

[WoofnHoof]

Why did they move the horse in the first place - Brandy was not in any trouble at the foster carer's site.

We will always wonder - would Brandy have succumbed to colic if she had not been moved.

That question will never be answered but she was prone to colic and the decision to PTS was made 3 weeks after she'd been moved, had it been within a week of moving I'd be more inclined to think it was related to the move but after three weeks who knows?

If they hadn't moved the horse and had decided the horse was too unstable healthwise to be rehomed responsibly would the carer have allowed them to come and put the horse down?

It's difficult with horses it can take quite a long time to know whether they are going to fully recover and assessed as able to live a reasonably healthy life, ideally I would think that moves to assess and adopt the horse should have been sorted out within weeks of it being rescued and responsibility for vet bills etc worked out beforehand, not 7 months later but of course this situation is far from ideal. Perhaps attempts were made to do this and for some reason it didn't happen? There isn't a lot of information about what was actually happening re communication between carer and RSPCA in the 7 months prior so it's really difficult to say where things started to go wrong and why.

[Jed]

Why did they move the horse in the first place - Brandy was not in any trouble at the foster carer's site.

We will always wonder - would Brandy have succumbed to colic if she had not been moved.

And, did she succomb to colic?

[Skitch]

That poor horse.. I find it very disturbing that the horse was thrown in a dump when the previous owner was told it was buried.. why would they want to lie like that.. ? They're obviously ashamed.. :/.

I imagine that all animals which pass through the RSPCA are sent to the dead animal dump, as the horse was. That would be standard practice, so the horse was sent there as standard practice.

That was exactly my thoughts.. why lie about it? I'm sure the lady would have been much less offended if she was just told the horse was euthanized and disposed of.. even better they could have given her the opportunity to dispose if it herself since she seems particularly sensitive about it and saved themselves the trouble! It just seems so silly that they lied about it and I think it proves that they are running scared and trying to patch things up.. silly silly.

Maybe they didn't lie, maybe whoever she spoke to genuinely didn't know. I enquired about a horse at the council animal management centre once the woman at the desk said when the time for reclaiming is up the horses go to the sales. I said "oh so they get dogged", she said "no they go to the sale", turns out she genuinely didn't know that an unknown, unridden horse at the sales has a snowballs chance in hell of not being dogged, a ridden horse is generally better off but still not necessarily safe. I rode a horse in a sale a while back because the chicken s*** owner wouldn't even give the poor bugger that chance and I still had to specify to the auctioneer he wasn't to be dogged because the first bidder was a dogger!

Combine that with the fact that most non-horsey people (and even some horsey people) are unaware of the regulations surrounding the burial of horses and it's entirely possible that many of the people without this knowledge assume that horses are generally buried. I've known people who've had horses die and they've just dragged them down to the back of the property - out of sight out of mind for some, well except for the poor buggers on neighbouring properties downstream

That is a very good point.. it could have just been a break down in communication. Perhaps whoever it was that told the lady her horse had been "buried" was just putting it politely that the horse had been disposed of.

[ILK]

That poor horse.. I find it very disturbing that the horse was thrown in a dump when the previous owner was told it was buried.. why would they want to lie like that.. ? They're obviously ashamed.. :/.

I imagine that all animals which pass through the RSPCA are sent to the dead animal dump, as the horse was. That would be standard practice, so the horse was sent there as standard practice.

That was exactly my thoughts.. why lie about it? I'm sure the lady would have been much less offended if she was just told the horse was euthanized and disposed of.. even better they could have given her the opportunity to dispose if it herself since she seems particularly sensitive about it and saved themselves the trouble! It just seems so silly that they lied about it and I think it proves that they are running scared and trying to patch things up.. silly silly.

Maybe they didn't lie, maybe whoever she spoke to genuinely didn't know. I enquired about a horse at the council animal management centre once the woman at the desk said when the time for reclaiming is up the horses go to the sales. I said "oh so they get dogged", she said "no they go to the sale", turns out she genuinely didn't know that an unknown, unridden horse at the sales has a snowballs chance in hell of not being dogged, a ridden horse is generally better off but still not necessarily safe. I rode a horse in a sale a while back because the chicken s*** owner wouldn't even give the poor bugger that chance and I still had to specify to the auctioneer he wasn't to be dogged because the first bidder was a dogger!

Combine that with the fact that most non-horsey people (and even some horsey people) are unaware of the regulations surrounding the burial of horses and it's entirely possible that many of the people without this knowledge assume that horses are generally buried. I've known people who've had horses die and they've just dragged them down to the back of the property - out of sight out of mind for some, well except for the poor buggers on neighbouring properties downstream

That is a very good point.. it could have just been a break down in communication. Perhaps whoever it was that told the lady her horse had been "buried" was just putting it politely that the horse had been disposed of.

BreaK downs in communication are just not acceptable where lives are at stake. Maybe they should put people in the rescue roles with better communication skills. Judging by the original story this horse should not have died and it certainly doesn't take a brain surgeon to work that out.

[Skitch]

That poor horse.. I find it very disturbing that the horse was thrown in a dump when the previous owner was told it was buried.. why would they want to lie like that.. ? They're obviously ashamed.. :/.

I imagine that all animals which pass through the RSPCA are sent to the dead animal dump, as the horse was. That would be standard practice, so the horse was sent there as standard practice.

That was exactly my thoughts.. why lie about it? I'm sure the lady would have been much less offended if she was just told the horse was euthanized and disposed of.. even better they could have given her the opportunity to dispose if it herself since she seems particularly sensitive about it and saved themselves the trouble! It just seems so silly that they lied about it and I think it proves that they are running scared and trying to patch things up.. silly silly.

Maybe they didn't lie, maybe whoever she spoke to genuinely didn't know. I enquired about a horse at the council animal management centre once the woman at the desk said when the time for reclaiming is up the horses go to the sales. I said "oh so they get dogged", she said "no they go to the sale", turns out she genuinely didn't know that an unknown, unridden horse at the sales has a snowballs chance in hell of not being dogged, a ridden horse is generally better off but still not necessarily safe. I rode a horse in a sale a while back because the chicken s*** owner wouldn't even give the poor bugger that chance and I still had to specify to the auctioneer he wasn't to be dogged because the first bidder was a dogger!

Combine that with the fact that most non-horsey people (and even some horsey people) are unaware of the regulations surrounding the burial of horses and it's entirely possible that many of the people without this knowledge assume that horses are generally buried. I've known people who've had horses die and they've just dragged them down to the back of the property - out of sight out of mind for some, well except for the poor buggers on neighbouring properties downstream

That is a very good point.. it could have just been a break down in communication. Perhaps whoever it was that told the lady her horse had been "buried" was just putting it politely that the horse had been disposed of.

BreaK downs in communication are just not acceptable where lives are at stake. Maybe they should put people in the rescue roles with better communication skills. Judging by the original story this horse should not have died and it certainly doesn't take a brain surgeon to work that out.

I dont think anyone is denying that the RSPCA has severeley effed up and it's highly plausible that horse did not need to be put to sleep.. the discussion was specifically about the disposal of the horses body itself.

[WoofnHoof]

BreaK downs in communication are just not acceptable where lives are at stake. Maybe they should put people in the rescue roles with better communication skills. Judging by the original story this horse should not have died and it certainly doesn't take a brain surgeon to work that out.

Maybe they would put people in rescue roles with better communication but maybe they were all volunteers? Maybe there aren't enough volunteers in townsville with good communication skills or even good horse knowledge? Who knows? And who knows exactly how much communication actually occured between the parties? Obviously not enough but where exactly did communication break down when in the beginning the relationship appeared to be satisfactory? What was the catalyst for the breakdown? Staff turnover has been identified as a possible reason for the communication issue, is that the only issue?

Whether or not the horse should have died or would have died cannot be ascertained since it's unclear whether the colic was ultimately treatable, perhaps the horse should have been put down 5, 6, 7 months earlier rather than having to repeatedly endure colic episodes and treatment? God knows there are plenty of people who will keep treating an animal with a serious and recurring illness who is to say whether it's the right thing to do?

I'm not passing judgement about whether the horse was better off dead or not, or whether the carer was making decisions that were merely prolonging the inevitable, or whether the RSPCA was wrong in taking the horse, because I don't know enough about the nature of the illness or the circumstances leading up to and including it's death. As far as I can tell no one here has that information we only have some newspaper reports and facebook so any judgements made (whether they be by brain surgeons or otherwise) have the potential to be way off the mark.

At the end of the day I'm not interested in whose 'fault' this is I'm interested in how it happened and why, so shoot me if I'm a little skeptical about the how and why being put down to 'the RSPCA sucks', that really doesn't answer any of the questions posed by this situation, nor does it do anything to prevent it happening again.

[casowner]

Just a question to the horsey people if you had a horse that had reoccurring colic that was having a relapse and you had sought the advice of your local Equine Vets including a Senior Vet and an Equine Expert from James Cook University and they all agreed that the best course of action was euthanasia would you do it? I personally would myself but I am interested in genuine answers. I have lost two ponies to colic before, one when I was achild and another mini that kept reoccuring and after the third time he didn't pull through. My new colt went down 3 days after getting him which I believe was because of having too much grain (my fault) but he recovered very quickly as I kept walking him in the paddock with mares and he bounced around like a dufous. This is just a personal question

[WoofnHoof]

Just a question to the horsey people if you had a horse that had reoccurring colic that was having a relapse and you had sought the advice of your local Equine Vets including a Senior Vet and an Equine Expert from James Cook University and they all agreed that the best course of action was euthanasia would you do it? I personally would myself but I am interested in genuine answers. I have lost two ponies to colic before, one when I was achild and another mini that kept reoccuring and after the third time he didn't pull through. My new colt went down 3 days after getting him which I believe was because of having too much grain (my fault) but he recovered very quickly as I kept walking him in the paddock with mares and he bounced around like a dufous. This is just a personal question

Depends on what is causing the colic, if the root cause were known it would depend on whether it is ultimately treatable or not and what the treatment involves, duration etc. If the cause is unknown well it then becomes a personal decision and everyone has a different place for their 'line in the sand'. When my boy was colicing severely I was prepared to have him undergo surgery even though it wasn't recommended because of his age (17), but the cause was unknown and because the horse was having other health issues when for most of his life he'd been exceptionally healthy, I felt there was a root cause and if we could only identify it and treat it then the problems would resolve - which they did thankfully. Whether he would have survived surgery at his age I don't know ultimately it may have made things worse but those are the choices you have to make as an owner you have to assess the information you have and try to make the best decision you can.

[wolfgirl71]

Hi,

I'm a passionate animal lover, veterinary nurse and foster carer. The whole Brandy thing is heartbreaking but I've asked Michael Beatty about this case and this is his reply below. If everyone could please just read it. Thank you.

There is a lot more to this than is at first apparent. For a start, we believe that a number of people who have posted comments are currently being prosecuted by the RSPCA or are friends of theirs. If you live in Townsville you will probably be aware of their identities.

In regard to Brandy, let me assure you that the Foster carer (Siobhan) was made aware of Brandy’s situation by our Inspector who had rescued her. Before any animal is adopted they have to undergo further veterinary checks before they go to their new home and there was no doubt Brandy needed to be checked as she was still suffering from the occasional bout of colic. This could have been handled better from a customer service point of view but everything was done with the horse’s welfare in mind. Our Shelter operations manager kept in contact with Siobhan (Brandy’s foster carer) on Saturday when Brandy came down with a really bad case of colic. He told her that Brandy might have to be put down and Siobhan said she would abide by whatever decision the vets decided to make. The next day was his daughter’s christening and he didn’t find out that Brandy had been put down until after that when he rang her.

No matter what you read in the Townsville Bulletin or in this forum, I can assure you the RSPCA takes the care of animals and the carrying out of its responsibilities very seriously indeed. The decision to put down Brandy was made after consultation with local Equine Vets, our Senior Vet and an Equine Expert from James Cook University. Our CEO owns up and takes responsibility for making the very difficult decision to euthanize the horse on humane grounds about 11.00pm on Saturday night after receiving advice from the equine experts. We knew that we would cop flack from the media and the general public. However this shouldn’t be the reason to allow the horse to continue to suffer. If the Townsville Bulletin had its way the horse would be wallowing around suffering while continuing to make good headlines for them. I’m sorry but we take our role much more seriously than that.

Michael Beatty

Media And Community Relations

RSPCA Queensland

[redangel]

..ok read that but why again was the horse (in good health) removed to be assessed??? Sounds alot of work/organisation that could of happened at the foster carers property.

[wolfgirl71]

..ok read that but why again was the horse (in good health) removed to be assessed??? Sounds alot of work/organisation that could of happened at the foster carers property.

I always have to return my animals for vet assessment before being made available for adoption (as does everyone).

[WoofnHoof]

Haha casowner sneaky! I was wondering about the reference to JCU!

Thanks for the info wolfgirl71

[Jed]

Just a question to the horsey people if you had a horse that had reoccurring colic that was having a relapse and you had sought the advice of your local Equine Vets including a Senior Vet and an Equine Expert from James Cook University and they all agreed that the best course of action was euthanasia would you do it? I personally would myself but I am interested in genuine answers. I have lost two ponies to colic before, one when I was achild and another mini that kept reoccuring and after the third time he didn't pull through. My new colt went down 3 days after getting him which I believe was because of having too much grain (my fault) but he recovered very quickly as I kept walking him in the paddock with mares and he bounced around like a dufous. This is just a personal question

Yes, I would. I would presume that all tests had been done, and it was decided by experts that euthanasia was the best option. I would also euthanase rather than operate.

"Colic" is a generic term for a multitude of problems. "Colic" can range from the horse looking anxious, with a raised temperature, to a major blockage, twisted intestines, enteroliths to a ruptured stomach.

I would hazad a learned guess that as a windsucker, this horse experienced mild colic symptoms from continually swallowing air. I mentioned treatment in a previous post.

It's all as my previous post. I told you it was.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Jed

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Hi,

I'm a passionate animal lover, veterinary nurse and foster carer. The whole Brandy thing is heartbreaking but I've asked Michael Beatty about this case and this is his reply below. If everyone could please just read it. Thank you.

There is a lot more to this than is at first apparent. For a start, we believe that a number of people who have posted comments are currently being prosecuted by the RSPCA or are friends of theirs. If you live in Townsville you will probably be aware of their identities.

<snip>

Michael Beatty

Media And Community Relations

RSPCA Queensland

now this annoyed me. i have commented on this post and i am appalled that i am being seen as someone who the rspca is prosecuting or one of their friends and that because of this i have a somewhat skewed view of the situation. i am none of those and if this is how the rspca media and community relations person sees genuine concerns then they need a lesson on how to manage stakehiolders. this is outrageous.

[casowner]

I am sure the line you are referring to isn't aimed at this forum rather than other media in which this case has been mentioned, however I am sure they would equally be as appalled by some of the comments aimed at them regarding this case. I believe that the line that was bolded was aimed at non pure bred people so just because that email was quoted on this forum doesn't mean it was directly personally to any posters here.

It seems apparent that the foster carer was made aware of the horses condition on the day it was euthanased, which is something that legally they did not have to do as she belonged to the RSPCA. It seems the foster carer agreed to go by the vets decision which has not been mentioned previously and as I said earlier it made no sense that everyone would collude together out of the pure fact that they wanted to be nasty.

There seems to be more questions now that some facts have been brought to light, but again I can not see various vets plus another from James Cook University colluding together. Unfortunately to get the whole story you need full truths on all sides and as any animal issue is highly emotional the chances of everyone being totally honest is highly doubtful.

Edited April 29, 2010 by casowner

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

I am sure the line you are referring to isn't aimed at this forum rather than other media in which this case has been mentioned, however I am sure they would equally be as appalled by some of the comments aimed at them regarding this case. I believe that the line that was bolded was aimed at non pure bred people so just because that email was quoted on this forum doesn't mean it was directly personally to any posters here.

It seems apparent that the foster carer was made aware of the horses condition on the day it was euthanased, which is something that legally they did not have to do as she belonged to the RSPCA. It seems the foster carer agreed to go by the vets decision which has not been mentioned previously and as I said earlier it made no sense that everyone would collude together out of the pure fact that they wanted to be nasty.

There seems to be more questions now that some facts have been brought to light, but again I can not see various vets plus another from James Cook University colluding together.

hmm....ok i will accept that but it should have been made clear. look my only issue is why was the horse moved when it could have been easily checked out at the place it had been living for 7 months.

if this questions was answered then i would be happy

[spottychick]

Hi,

I'm a passionate animal lover, veterinary nurse and foster carer. The whole Brandy thing is heartbreaking but I've asked Michael Beatty about this case and this is his reply below. If everyone could please just read it. Thank you.

There is a lot more to this than is at first apparent. For a start, we believe that a number of people who have posted comments are currently being prosecuted by the RSPCA or are friends of theirs. If you live in Townsville you will probably be aware of their identities.

Michael Beatty

Media And Community Relations

RSPCA Queensland

Oh for goodness sake! He undermines the credibility of the rest of his email by making such a ridiculous statement. How can he "believe" any such thing? Has he read all the comments and investigated people's ISPs and made definite connections to our identities? Of course not. All he is doing here is dismissing a broad range of people's genuine concerns with a red herring.

And anyway, so what? Why does this make someone's concerns about the RSPCA any less legitimate? It just means they have first-hand knowledge of the way the RSPCA works and are probably in a better position than most to make critical comments.

I have never been prosecuted by anyone let alone the RSPCA and nor do I know anyone personally who has. Like many others here, I'm simply a concerned ex-supporter who loves animals and would like to understand why the RSPCA keep getting such bad press. Mr Beatty might not want to "believe" that but nevertheless it's true.

Perhaps if they stopped denying that they have an image problem, trivialising people who criticise and made a genuine effort to confront their problems/people's (mis)conceptions we wouldn't keep having these threads in this forum.

I would love to believe his side of the story but when he starts with a sweeping dismissive comment like that it really is hard to take him at face value.

[casowner]

Again, I suggest that the comments MAY NOT HAVE BEEN DIRECTED at this particular forum.

Jaxx'sBuddy I believe that all foster animals must be returned to the RSPCA so that they can undertake their final health check, wolfgirl71's post seems to verify that.

If people do a search on the subject various comments from different areas/forums have been quite negative, maybe the comments in Wolfgirl71's email were directed there. I am sure if those of you are offended regarding those lines email RSPCA QLD direct you may get clarification regarding that, but to see a line and take it personally when in fact it probably wasn't is causes further anger for maybe no reason

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Again, I suggest that the comments MAY NOT HAVE BEEN DIRECTED at this particular forum.

Jaxx'sBuddy I believe that all foster animals must be returned to the RSPCA so that they can undertake their final health check, wolfgirl71's post seems to verify that.

If people do a search on the subject various comments from different areas/forums have been quite negative, maybe the comments in Wolfgirl71's email were directed there. I am sure if those of you are offended regarding those lines email RSPCA QLD direct you may get clarification regarding that, but to see a line and take it personally when in fact it probably wasn't is causes further anger for maybe no reason

the poster then had a responsibility to explain the email rather than just post it. regardless of this he has undermined his credibility because he clearly sees all negative comments as coming from people who have an agenda. as i said before this futher exacebates the rspca's stakeholder management problems and they do have this problem

[Are You Serious Jo]

I am sure the line you are referring to isn't aimed at this forum rather than other media in which this case has been mentioned, however I am sure they would equally be as appalled by some of the comments aimed at them regarding this case. I believe that the line that was bolded was aimed at non pure bred people so just because that email was quoted on this forum doesn't mean it was directly personally to any posters here.

It seems apparent that the foster carer was made aware of the horses condition on the day it was euthanased, which is something that legally they did not have to do as she belonged to the RSPCA. It seems the foster carer agreed to go by the vets decision which has not been mentioned previously and as I said earlier it made no sense that everyone would collude together out of the pure fact that they wanted to be nasty.

There seems to be more questions now that some facts have been brought to light, but again I can not see various vets plus another from James Cook University colluding together.

hmm....ok i will accept that but it should have been made clear. look my only issue is why was the horse moved when it could have been easily checked out at the place it had been living for 7 months.

if this questions was answered then i would be happy

My thoughts as well and seems to be the biggest issue, why not send a vet to assess and take blood, surely that would have been a much better option for the horse and the rspca.