Here We Go Mandatory Desexing For All Pet Puppies.

[Alyosha]

Ahhh. So breeders are ok to make money, but others involved with animals should be much much poorer. It all makes sense now.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Ahhh. So breeders are ok to make money, but others involved with animals should be much much poorer. It all makes sense now.

alyosha not at all. i think the rspca should be paying their workers more, i respect the work you do and everyone who attempts to make the abandoned animal situation better.

i apologise if i have written anything that gave you that idea. in fact, i am appalled that in sa alone they have $8 million in CASH and are paying workers crap wages...all i was saying is that until workers start saying its not good enough then they will continue to have low wages.

Edited December 14, 2010 by Jaxx'sBuddy

[OSoSwift]

The difference is the RSPCA is a not for profit organisation. This means that apart from funds needed to reserve to cover up coming costs etc the rest should go back into the organisation.

As such a not for profit organisation should not be making miliions of dollars profit. IF they were a private business fine, but they are not.

Edited December 14, 2010 by OSoSwift

[BigPaws]

Jaxx, I think you may be misunderstanding what I'm saying.

My comment was "I am talking about people breeding dogs because they can, and selling the puppies as registered dogs because they can make money out of them."

What I mean is that there are Registered Breeders who breed only for profit, not for the future of the breed. I am in no way saying that ALL breeders do this. My concern is that it is too easy for people to become registered breeders, and breed for nothing but profit.

[Alyosha]

So $8 million in cash. Do we know what their needs are over the next year? What was their expenditure last year? Has that cash been put aside, or is it the result of an allocation or income? Details make these facts fit into a picture, just one figure can be read a thousand different ways.

I think people need to step back and realise that large organisations have large needs. A couple of million dollars is nothing for a big company. It disappears like water down a drain.

If we step back and rationally compare budget, factoring in logistics, facilities, workloads, fleets, insurance, equipment etc with a comparable sized Government department would we see much difference? I'm honestly asking. Fo as I have been very close to RSPCA budgeting in the past, I haven't done such comparison figures. Anyone?

I have seen the soggy ends though, when there is gaps between income, and it is damn hard sometimes for these groups to make sure their staff all get paid some weeks.

The point I was trying to make Jaxx, without being inflammatory, and actually having a little background relevant knowledge, is that money only goes so far. And animal welfare, of the quality that our society rightly demands, does not come cheap at all.

Edited December 14, 2010 by Alyosha

[Are You Serious Jo]

The thing is they are actually a big business, but also get charity status. They are pretty unique in Australia, they also get more power than the police and can regulate other businesses they compete with. Their staff do deserve to be better paid, no question, but I wouldn't be so tolerant if I were employed by them.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

So $8 million in cash. Do we know what their needs are over the next year? What was their expenditure last year? Has that cash been put aside, or is it the result of an allocation or income? Details make these facts fit into a picture, just one figure can be read a thousand different ways.

I think people need to step back and realise that large organisations have large needs. A couple of million dollars is nothing for a big company. It disappears like water down a drain.

If we step back and rationally compare budget, factoring in logistics, facilities, workloads, fleets, insurance, equipment etc with a comparable sized Government department would we see much difference? I'm honestly asking. Fo as I have been very close to RSPCA budgeting in the past, I haven't done such comparison figures. Anyone?

I have seen the soggy ends though, when there is gaps between income, and it is damn hard sometimes for these groups to make sure their staff all get paid some weeks.

The point I was trying to make Jaxx, without being inflammatory, and actually having a little background relevant knowledge, is that money only goes so far. And animal welfare, of the quality that our society rightly demands, does not come cheap at all.

i have run some fairly large organisations and i can read financial statements. if i was on the board of the rspca i would be very concerned at having that much cash around for several reasons, one is it isnt working hard enough for the organisation, two it looks unseemly in a not for profit organisation, three it stops people donating as much because it looks like the are awash with cash (which they are) and four it would worry me that the staff would start to feel disaffected, especially if they have to scrimp and scrape to look after the animals (not saying this is happening)

so whilst i may not know the rspca, i do know business and balance sheets.

eta and the cash amount is increasing every year so they are not spending

Edited December 14, 2010 by Jaxx'sBuddy

[Alyosha]

Like I said, I don't know each state. But they are all separate entities, as is RSPCA Australia. While it has an overseeing capacity ot really doesn't involve itself in the individual state org's matters. Tarring all with one brush is like saying all teh state's governments are the same, and if one is bad then of course they all must be.

And trust me Rev Jo, RSPCA do not get more power than police.

[whippets]

So $8 million in cash. Do we know what their needs are over the next year? What was their expenditure last year? Has that cash been put aside, or is it the result of an allocation or income? Details make these facts fit into a picture, just one figure can be read a thousand different ways.

I think people need to step back and realise that large organisations have large needs. A couple of million dollars is nothing for a big company. It disappears like water down a drain.

If we step back and rationally compare budget, factoring in logistics, facilities, workloads, fleets, insurance, equipment etc with a comparable sized Government department would we see much difference? I'm honestly asking. Fo as I have been very close to RSPCA budgeting in the past, I haven't done such comparison figures. Anyone?

I have seen the soggy ends though, when there is gaps between income, and it is damn hard sometimes for these groups to make sure their staff all get paid some weeks.

The point I was trying to make Jaxx, without being inflammatory, and actually having a little background relevant knowledge, is that money only goes so far. And animal welfare, of the quality that our society rightly demands, does not come cheap at all.

i have run some fairly large organisations and i can read financial statements. if i was on the board of the rspca i would be very concerned at having that much cash around for several reasons, one is it isnt working hard enough for the organisation, two it looks unseemly in a not for profit organisation, three it stops people donating as much because it looks like the are awash with cash (which they are) and four it would worry me that the staff would start to feel disaffected, especially if they have to scrimp and scrape to look after the animals (not saying this is happening)

so whilst i may not know the rspca, i do know business and balance sheets.

eta and the cash amount is increasing every year so they are not spending

Yup. They are running it as business for profit (and a very healthy profit as well). I don't think Aloysha can get his/her head around that (or doesn't want to). Like I said before. If the place you worked in has to scrimp then it is a mismanagement of funds, poor budgeting or incorrect accounting systems (or a combination) OR they know the people will work for a pittance. They know you all won't strike, or protest because it will be the animals that suffer. The R$PCA treat you all like pieces of crap like they do everyone else.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Like I said, I don't know each state. But they are all separate entities, as is RSPCA Australia. While it has an overseeing capacity ot really doesn't involve itself in the individual state org's matters. Tarring all with one brush is like saying all teh state's governments are the same, and if one is bad then of course they all must be.

And trust me Rev Jo, RSPCA do not get more power than police.

well maybe i will number crunch for all the state rspca's.

[Adnil444]

What bothers me the most about domestic pets in Australia is that over 100,000 of them are euthanised every year, not because they are sick, bad, or dangerous - but because they are unwanted.

Yet there are so many more being deliberately and accidentally bred to add to this amount. None of it makes sense to me.

Desexing really is the only thing that can stop this.

I sadly doubt, laws or not, that I will ever see this society getting to the point where we stop euthanising good animals simply because we have over-bred.

I'm with you on this one. Desexing is the only way to stop the unwanted supply of dogs and cats out there. I have no problems with any of the laws wanting to be introduced. Registered breeders should be the only ones allowed to have undesexed dogs. Pounds, rescues, shelters, pet shops (which I wish they could ban from selling puppies and kittens), all should be desexed before going to their new homes.

Wait until March-April 2011, when all the Christmas puppies and kittens hit the rescue pages or pounds etc. So very sad.

[Souff]

No wait, before you do, I have a question.

I have it on good authority that the distributors of HSD keep the RSPCA in free food, by the truckload.

Does this not happen in the ACT?

Souff

Dog and cat food... yep. But there are a whole world of animals in their care that don't eat dog and cat food. Thousands of them.

All creatures remember??

Now come on Aloysha, you know very well that the greater MAJORITY of the animals in care are dogs and cats. It is written up in the reports for all to see, so don't stretch this debate beyond the bounds of credibility. If staff were going cap in hand to suppliers of rabbit food or for hay/oats for the horses and the goats, then I suggest to you that this happened because of POOR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, not lack of funds in the first instance.

The good people who innocently donated their hard earned dollars (and their houses when they die) to feed the homeless bunnies and the nags and the goats etc would be shocked if they knew that their money was not being used as it was intended.

Blind Freddy can see that the income is more than generous, and is always is well up there in the annual reports. The dollar value of the donated HSD for the cats and dogs is HUGE so this equates to an enormous saving in expenditure. Cats and dogs are their core business. If the RSPCA had to pay for their food then you might have a case for crying poor, but that is not the case at all.

Souff

[Souff]

What bothers me the most about domestic pets in Australia is that over 100,000 of them are euthanised every year, not because they are sick, bad, or dangerous - but because they are unwanted.

Yet there are so many more being deliberately and accidentally bred to add to this amount. None of it makes sense to me.

Desexing really is the only thing that can stop this.

I sadly doubt, laws or not, that I will ever see this society getting to the point where we stop euthanising good animals simply because we have over-bred.

I'm with you on this one. Desexing is the only way to stop the unwanted supply of dogs and cats out there. I have no problems with any of the laws wanting to be introduced. Registered breeders should be the only ones allowed to have undesexed dogs. Pounds, rescues, shelters, pet shops (which I wish they could ban from selling puppies and kittens), all should be desexed before going to their new homes.

Wait until March-April 2011, when all the Christmas puppies and kittens hit the rescue pages or pounds etc. So very sad.

You see to have forgotten another important part of the remedy. Education. Teaching responsibiity to owners, like - "if you OWN AN ANIMAL then you are RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LIFE OF THAT ANIMAL and NO, YOU CANNOT PALM OFF YOUR RESPONSIBILITY OF ANIMAL OWNERSHIP ON TO A RESCUE ORGANISATION OR A POUND. IF YOU own the animal, then YOU TAKE CARE OF IT .... til death do us part".

Don't want the dog any more, for whatever reason? Then you be the one to hold the dog in your arms while the vet gives it the final needle. Not an easy task.

If pet owners had to ask themselves "Can I do that?" BEFORE they committed to animal ownership there would be very few dogs and cats on death row.

Most animals are on death row because they were with the wrong owners.

Souff

[Annie99]

Very interesting to read this.

Thanks for posting.

I think they should do it for kittens as well

[Are You Serious Jo]

They do have more power than the police and they are answerable to no one. If they wanted to truly stop the unwanted dogs and cats they would implement low cost desexing. The main reason a lot of people don't get their pets done is cost, they say so. In a lot of shelters they already have the infrastructure to allow the public to drop animals off for desexing and I know how much the materials are that are used I looked them up.

Looking forward to JB's number crunching though.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

They do have more power than the police and they are answerable to no one. If they wanted to truly stop the unwanted dogs and cats they would implement low cost desexing. The main reason a lot of people don't get their pets done is cost, they say so. In a lot of shelters they already have the infrastructure to allow the public to drop animals off for desexing and I know how much the materials are that are used I looked them up.

Looking forward to JB's number crunching though.

the number crunching will be here tomorrow hopefully. lots of annual reports to read

[Souff]

They do have more power than the police and they are answerable to no one.

In at least 1 state of Australia the RSPCA can enter premises without a warrant.

The police in that same state must get a warrant before they can enter the same premises.

Yet, unlike the police, there is no Ombudsman or Tribunal to whom the public can go to about RSPCA matters, and no ICAC for the RSPCA to answer to.

Souff

[Wazzat Xolo]

That's what I was thinking Jo. They've got the money, the annual reports show that. But i guess the way you get bigger and richer is not to spend any of it, while at the same time crying poor and sucking the $$$ out of Jo Gullible at every opportunity.

Dont forget the Breeders licence driven by their greed...cos it isnt for the dogs welfare.

I would welcome a breeders license fee!! After all breeders want the best for the breed and thats what its all about! and all dogs to be desexed unless a registered breeder breeding purebred dogs under a canine authority.

But then again I am not the average dog person! lol

[Wazzat Xolo]

They do have more power than the police and they are answerable to no one.

In at least 1 state of Australia the RSPCA can enter premises without a warrant.

The police in that same state must get a warrant before they can enter the same premises.

Yet, unlike the police, there is no Ombudsman or Tribunal to whom the public can go to about RSPCA matters, and no ICAC for the RSPCA to answer to.

Souff

In fact they can enter if they believe ( have evidence) that am offence is being commited under the AWA ( Police who are General Inspectors can enter premises under the AWA as well for the functions covered under that act.

It hasnt been tested on whether the RSPCA can be accountable to the ombudsman ( IN WA) at least, so far

[asal]

Ahhh. So breeders are ok to make money, but others involved with animals should be much much poorer. It all makes sense now.

alyosha not at all. i think the rspca should be paying their workers more, i respect the work you do and everyone who attempts to make the abandoned animal situation better.

i apologise if i have written anything that gave you that idea. in fact, i am appalled that in sa alone they have $8 million in CASH and are paying workers crap wages...all i was saying is that until workers start saying its not good enough then they will continue to have low wages.

well they certainly dont pay the ceo crap. 120,000 sounds pretty comfy for nsw's