Judy Gard - All Done

[Steve]

Can we not argue over this, please. This is really important for all of us so let's just have a calm head at this point in time.

Steve, I seem to recall when this first happened that someone said that if any of us (animal owners) have our animals seized, that we are liable for day to day impound costs until the animals are released ?

eta regardless of the court outcome

Thats true but they didnt have Judy's dogs for that long as her legal people went in to help pretty quickly.

What's the daily rate? I remember when Judy's matter first hit General someone mentioned the rate and all I could think was that I can commercially board all of my dogs for less than what they charge for one dog.

The bill she has received from the RSPCA is reasonable and no where near the expected.

[raz]

The bill she has received from the RSPCA is reasonable and no where near the expected.

That's good to know. Thanks steve.

[sllebasi]

dont understand this at all, absolute disgrace

[Steve]

The disgrace is in the law being in existence in the first place.

As a pet owner I have the right to take my dog to a vet of my choice and have it bumped off -I can take it to a vet of my choice and have the vet desex it which has potentially long term health issues yet I can't have its voice lowered by a vet to make it easier to live with unless I get an order from my council? They know that as an owner you dont break the law by having the vet lower the voice - because its the vet and not you who does the operation.You can hardly prosecute an owner for asking for the operation and being treated as if you are soliciting someone to murder your husband! So they make you a criminal because you take your dog to a dog show unless you have made sure you have the correct paperwork before the vet does the op.

Forget about the fact that you go to a vet and assume they know what they can and cant do and you rely on their expertise and knowledge.Are we to all go to vet school or law school and specialise in every service we may have to use in order to know the professionals we use and consult know the law??? Do we need to know real estate law before we ask a real estate agent to sell our house?

This law is a bloody disgrace - it should never have been able to happen and common sense has to tell us surely that as a dog is our property we should have the right to have it operated on for ANYTHING by a qualified vet if we want to.

Then we turn on Bondi Animal rescue and watch them bragging about the fake testcles they have implanted into their male dog ! How many council rangers paperwork did they need for that?

However, in my opinion there is little point in anyone other than the group which the law affects saying anything to have the law squashed.

this is Vic dogs job 100% of the way because its THEIR DOG SHOWS

No point in going after the RSPCA on this one and people who do show their animals should be yelling and bangung drums that deafen the world at the outrage but instead they will say - no big deal it wont affect them because if they need a dog debarked they will do as they are told.

What needs to happen to make them stand up for their members?

[aussielover]

aussie, the operations were done in NSW where they complied with the law in NSW.

But the Victorian law says that debarking is illegal if it's done outside Victoria, & the owner is a resident of Victoria. (And extra penalty if that 'illegally' debarked dog is shown in Victoria.)

So it's the Victorian owner, not the NSW vet, who has broken a law. The NSW vet is not subject to Victorian law, but the Victorian owner of the dog is subject to Victorian law.

Wait sorry I\m confused???

If you have a debarked dog in NSW, QLD, NT WA SA etc you can't ever move to VIC unless you rehome the dog?

Or dos it mean you just can't exhibit the dog if you move to VIC?

[Steve]

aussie, the operations were done in NSW where they complied with the law in NSW.

But the Victorian law says that debarking is illegal if it's done outside Victoria, & the owner is a resident of Victoria. (And extra penalty if that 'illegally' debarked dog is shown in Victoria.)

So it's the Victorian owner, not the NSW vet, who has broken a law. The NSW vet is not subject to Victorian law, but the Victorian owner of the dog is subject to Victorian law.

Wait sorry I\m confused???

If you have a debarked dog in NSW, QLD, NT WA SA etc you can't ever move to VIC unless you rehome the dog?

Or dos it mean you just can't exhibit the dog if you move to VIC?

If you have the dog debarked somewhere other than Victoria without the paperwork If the dog has ever lived in Victoria for a day of its life prior to the debarking then you cannot return with the dog and show the dog.

[raz]

Or dos it mean you just can't exhibit the dog if you move to VIC?

It means you cant exhibit the dog. Really frigging stupid law, isnt it. And your vet who debarked the dog legally will get crucified.

[Moselle]

The disgrace is in the law being in existence in the first place.

As a pet owner I have the right to take my dog to a vet of my choice and have it bumped off -I can take it to a vet of my choice and have the vet desex it which has potentially long term health issues yet I can't have its voice lowered by a vet to make it easier to live with unless I get an order from my council? They know that as an owner you dont break the law by having the vet lower the voice - because its the vet and not you who does the operation.You can hardly prosecute an owner for asking for the operation and being treated as if you are soliciting someone to murder your husband! So they make you a criminal because you take your dog to a dog show unless you have made sure you have the correct paperwork before the vet does the op.

Forget about the fact that you go to a vet and assume they know what they can and cant do and you rely on their expertise and knowledge.Are we to all go to vet school or law school and specialise in every service we may have to use in order to know the professionals we use and consult know the law??? Do we need to know real estate law before we ask a real estate agent to sell our house?

This law is a bloody disgrace - it should never have been able to happen and common sense has to tell us surely that as a dog is our property we should have the right to have it operated on for ANYTHING by a qualified vet if we want to.

Then we turn on Bondi Animal rescue and watch them bragging about the fake testcles they have implanted into their male dog ! How many council rangers paperwork did they need for that?

However, in my opinion there is little point in anyone other than the group which the law affects saying anything to have the law squashed.

this is Vic dogs job 100% of the way because its THEIR DOG SHOWS

No point in going after the RSPCA on this one and people who do show their animals should be yelling and bangung drums that deafen the world at the outrage but instead they will say - no big deal it wont affect them because if they need a dog debarked they will do as they are told.

What needs to happen to make them stand up for their members?

Well said Steve, implants in a dog's scrotum and it's no big deal yet having one's dog debarked by a VET and it's a big stink! I just cant get my head around that one! How did this law ever go through? I would have thought that common sense would have prevailed....isn't it obvious that having one's dog debarked is a sign that the dog is loved and valued??? isn't that a better option than having it destroyed??? Disappointed in that Dogs Vic simply sat on their haunches and did bugger all and disgusted in the RSPCA in fighting to have this dastardly stupid law brought into place....it is the height of stupidity and totally nonsensical.

[Erny]

Yes - the law is SO STUPID I see that people, through disbelief, are finding it difficult to understand (or be convinced) that it wasn't about the debarking that got Judy 'pinched', it was about the fact that she exhibited the debarked dogs.

I do agree that the law needs to be targeted and removed. But the fact that there are orgs that (a) asked for that law; (b) saw it and did nothing before it was allowed through; and © wielded the power the law granted them even though they didn't have to take it as far as they did - well, to me, the whole lot is interwoven and can't be fully teased apart and they are just as guilty and stupid for supporting/enforcing such a law as those who sat without thought and wrote it up.

Edited for grammar.

Edited November 20, 2010 by Erny

[Steve]

vicdog members should resign in protest and join another state org instead while using interstate addresses.

Since when do vets commit acts of cruelty ? Since when does a government dictate what an owner and their dog's helath care professional decide what is in the best interest of the animal ? Why are we sitting still for this crap? its not just Victoria - you have to jump though hoops in most states to get a dog's voice lowered .

Why cant I make a the decision to have it done and ask my vet to do it - Its my dog - I have to live with it - its a qualified vet and a much much lesser operation than desexing and I dont have to have a council ranger visit to agree the dog is trying to escape or its weeing on the neighbours daisies through the fence to get it desexed do I ? Its stupid and I dont understand why we dont yell about it.

Edited November 20, 2010 by Steve

[fifi]

vicdog members should resign in protest and join another state org instead while using interstate addresses.

Happy to have many DOL friends 'live' here....

fifi

[Steve]

vicdog members should resign in protest and join another state org instead while using interstate addresses.

Happy to have many DOL friends 'live' here....

fifi

Me too.

[Erny]

Warning : Potential Stupid Question Alert !!!

Are there advantages to a (for example) NSW CC Membership by comparison to a (for example) Queensland CC Membership?

In other words, if one was going to move State for the sake of better CC representation, where would be the best?

[Paptacular!]

DogsNT numbers could use a boost. :)

[Steve]

Warning : Potential Stupid Question Alert !!!

Are there advantages to a (for example) NSW CC Membership by comparison to a (for example) Queensland CC Membership?

In other words, if one was going to move State for the sake of better CC representation, where would be the best?

Both as bad as each other .

[Erny]

Warning : Potential Stupid Question Alert !!!

Are there advantages to a (for example) NSW CC Membership by comparison to a (for example) Queensland CC Membership?

In other words, if one was going to move State for the sake of better CC representation, where would be the best?

Both as bad as each other .

DogsNT numbers could use a boost. :)

Ok - So, would we be better to live in NT?

Or is it the same answer as Steve has given above?

Edited November 20, 2010 by Erny

[Tralee]

Are there advantages to a (for example) NSW CC Membership by comparison to a (for example) Queensland CC Membership?

Both as bad as each other .

I won't show in NSW, its not that they don't understand the Maremma 'they're' complicit in the poor sportspersonship at shows.

Every instance of complaint in Qld is resolved with prudence and compassion.

Puppies born, have to be registered in the state they are whelped. That makes cross-border membership problematic.

Edited November 20, 2010 by pewithers

[Paptacular!]

Check out the DogsNT site, I'm not sure I could answer your questions accurately

Dogs NT

[Zug Zug]

Am I understanding this thread correctly? Someone had their dogs removed (seized) because they'd been de-barked? Even though the dogs were well cared for?

Please correct me. That doesn't make sense to me. What would be the point of seizing these dogs?

Or perhaps I have completely misunderstood what this is about.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Am I understanding this thread correctly? Someone had their dogs removed (seized) because they'd been de-barked? Even though the dogs were well cared for?

Please correct me. That doesn't make sense to me. What would be the point of seizing these dogs?

Or perhaps I have completely misunderstood what this is about.

no you have understood except the "crime" was not the debarking but the showing of a debarked dog