Steve Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 http://new.dpi.vic.gov.au/pets/domestic-an...ers-and-pounds/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortstep Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 (edited) I find this so selfish and hurtfull to all the animals that will now loose a chance at a new life. Why do they want to run off the smaller non profit rescuers. I hope that those doing resecue and concerned about rescue now realize just who is really on the side of the dogs and who is really just out to make $$ and push their political beliefs on others. I think the they just can't stand the thought or some people donating to other small groups or recuers and they want all the donation to go to them. So very very sad but hardly unexpected, is it. Edited April 4, 2011 by shortstep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john.davey.1960 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 Victoria is weel known for it's anti-companion animal stance so I am not at all surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greytmate Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 At first glance those laws seem ok to me. They are all designed with animal welfare in mind. Currently, many rescue organisations are very dodgy, they attract plenty of volunteers and burn them, they attract donations and waste them. In absence of any self regulation - to the point that animal hoarders are given encouragement - these laws seem sensible. What it requires is for rescue to be well organised, well funded, and to be able to form alliances with the vets and behaviourists that share the personal ethics that their organisation is espousing. I welcome a law review and wonder if there are individual points within it that need further discussion. If a group did meet those standards, how much more likely that orgs like LDH have no more excuses not to pass on dogs to them? They would lose their current argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swingin Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 Public comment is requested. I would be interested to see just what areas of the proposal people find objectionable? It reads the same as any caring person would treat their own pets. How could that be bad? Some here would boo Santa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leema Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 Here is one opinion on the proposal: http://www.savingpets.com.au/2011/04/chang...ou-should-care/ I haven't read all of the proposal (and nor am I likely to), so haven't formed an opinion. I just thought the above may offer a perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 Public comment is requested. I would be interested to see just what areas of the proposal people find objectionable?It reads the same as any caring person would treat their own pets. How could that be bad? Some here would boo Santa. I haven't been through it word by word either and at first glance it kind of reads ok to me too. But a couple of things stood out (if I've read them correctly). One of those things (for example) is the requirement for weekly visits to the Vet. Would this be at an "at cost" basis to the average rescuer/foster carer? Even if it was a discounted price, I could imagine the expense building up. Is it the financial burden side of things that will see the average rescuer/foster carer squeezed out? I'd like a bit of an explanation too, if someone wouldn't mind. Save me reading through things one word at a time, especially when I already don't fully understand the current rules and regulations pertaining to rescue/foster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shazzapug Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 It will be the dimise of foster carers.....domino affect, small rescues and shelters will be forced to close....so ditto what shortstep said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 4, 2011 Author Share Posted April 4, 2011 Much of how it is read hinges on the definition of a pound or shelter. “The Bureau of Animal Welfare Bulletin 43 includes this : ’Definition of animal shelters and the operation of rescue shelters Under the Domestic Animals Act 1994 an animal shelter means any premises maintained for the purpose of providing shelter to, or finding new homes for stray, abandoned or unwanted dogs or cats. People who operate foster care, rescue clubs or pet rescue programs should be considered an animal shelter if their premises are maintained to keep these animals and find new homes for them. If these points of proof are met under this definition these premises must be considered a domestic animal business and must be registered by Council and operate in accord with the Code of Practice for the Management of Dogs and Cats in Shelters and Pounds. Considering 2.8 says - An animal in foster care must not be sold or rehoused from the foster care premises - the animal must be returned to the establishment for the rehoming process. Its difficult to see how anyone in rescue is going to be able to say they are not taking animals onto their property and therefore be able to operate a rescue group without the need for compliance with this code. Basically it appears that 1. anyone who wants to have a private rescue group needs several truck loads of money and land. It means they are going to have to apply for and comply with some pretty heavy planning requirements for their property and regsulations and mandatory codes. Any idea that rescue in Victoria is ever going to be anything other than a business - whether that be for profit or a non profit is out of the question. 2. that foster carers are going to have to agree to having their homes audited for compliance and have some things to do which will chase off many volunteers. 3. It appears that if an animal doesnt go via a shelter [rescue group] on its way into foster care and if it doesnt go out via a shelter[ rescue group] the foster carer would be seen to become the shelter quote - an animal shelter means any premises maintained for the purpose of providing shelter to, or finding new homes for stray, abandoned or unwanted dogs or cats. This would seem to mean that even though now some groups operate by a co ordinator - organise for someone to pick up from a pound or premises and move the animal to the foster carers home without it ever staying at their home for assessment and quarantine,vet exam etc and re home the animal from the foster carers home that this would then mean the foster carers home becomes the shelter??????? 4. It means vets are going to have to play a much more major role in private rescue than they do now which will increase their income but in many areas it appears to me to be a bit over the top. Be careful what you wish for - tougher laws with more power to the RSPCA and council to police them. The fallout for this will be huge and private rescue had better get busy and do some heavy duty fundraising and take a good look at business plans if they are to survive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortstep Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 (edited) Be careful what you wish for - tougher laws with more power to the RSPCA and council to police them.The fallout for this will be huge and private rescue had better get busy and do some heavy duty fundraising and take a good look at business plans if they are to survive. I think this must be what the most Australians really want. Total control of every aspect of dogs. Otherwise there would be riots in the streets over stuff like this. Maybe what most Australians want is for every person to have to go to the RSPCA and the shire to get permisson to own a dog and that dog is then chosen for them but the RSPCA. Only that will be enough control and removal of indivudule choice to make most Australians feel good about dog ownership. I wish for this; The people of Victoria rise up and say enough it enough, we do not want or need government control of small private dog rescue, nor do we want the RSPCA to be the only rescue in this state. Am I dreaming? Do we really expect the small rescuers to take on the big 2 in Victoria aided by the government and win the right to keep saving dogs lives? They need lots of help if we expect small private rescue survive in Victoria and stop this from spreading across the country. Edited April 5, 2011 by shortstep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anniek Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 A domestic animal businesss is defined in the act as: Under the provisions of the Domestic Animal Act 1994 (previously the Domestic (Feral and Nuisance) Animals Act 1994 ) a domestic animal business is an animal shelter (welfare organisations such as the RSPCA and The Lost Dogs’ Home); a Council pound (operated by the Council or a contractor on behalf of Council); a pet shop (operated in a permanent location that must be open at least 5 days per week); a dog and/or cat breeding and/or rearing establishment (where the business is run for profit and the proprietor is not a member of an Applicable Organisation); a dog training establishment (where the business is run for profit); or an establishment boarding dogs or cats (where the business is run for profit to provide overnight, daycare or homecare boarding) Rescue groups generally do not have "premises maintained for the purpose of providing shelter to, or finding new homes for stray, abandoned or unwanted dogs or cats." They operate home care foster programs - ir there is no shelter, just foster carers who have foster dogs in their home. Regulation for home based foster groups would be welcomed by those who do the right thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Spotted Devil Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 As far as I am aware, the COP re foster carers refers to those that are part of an animal shelter/pound system not private foster carers: 1.6 Foster carerThis section applies to foster care programs conducted as part of a Council pound or animal shelter operation. A foster carer who undertakes foster care must have a written agreement with the establishment. Thus, any veterinary expenses etc are covered by the in-house or contracted vets for example. It's a very different system here when compared to NSW - most of the pound contracts are run by animal shelters and foster groups can't just pull dogs and cats out at will. There were some real problems with the previous legislation that actually prevented foster carers (as part of an animal shelter/pound) from fostering some classes of animals (e.g. juveniles etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 (edited) What is a private foster carer? How do they get their animals? Who do they work with? Are you saying that a private foster care can take a dog from the pound straight to their house without any requirement s on them , that they can have them there as long as they want and rehome them from their own home? Isnt the legislation designed to cut down the risk of hoarding? Isnt a foster carer attached to a non private welfare org less likely to be a hoarder and less likely to be getting it wrong? Now Im confused. By the definition posted above animal shelter means any premises maintained for the purpose of providing shelter to, or finding new homes for stray, abandoned or unwanted dogs or cats. People who operate foster care, rescue clubs or pet rescue programs should be considered an animal shelter if their premises are maintained to keep these animals and find new homes for them. If these points of proof are met under this definition these premises must be considered a domestic animal business and must be registered by Council and operate in accord with the Code of Practice for the Management of Dogs and Cats in Shelters and Pounds. Doesnt this mean that the foster carer has now become the shelter? Edited April 5, 2011 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anniek Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 (edited) I am a foster carer. I foster for Greyhound Safety Net who are not a shelter and do not have kennels. My premises are a home, a house, for people, my house is not "maintained for the purpose of providing shelter to animals" it is maintained for the purpose of putting a roof over the head of humans, my family. Having a foster dog living their is not the prime purpose of my dwelling/house. Edited April 5, 2011 by anniek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 I am a foster carer. I foster for Greyhound Safety Net who are not a shelter and do not have kennels.My premises are a home, a house, for people, my house is not "maintained for the purpose of providing shelter to animals" it is maintained for the purpose of putting a roof over the head of humans, my family. Having a foster dog living their is not the prime purpose of my dwelling/house. Where does it say it has to be mainatined as the Prime purpose of providing shelter to animals? Surely if you are taking in homeless animals some part of your home has to be maintained for the purpose of providing shelter to animals? In fact if you are taking them yourself straight form a pound or the resuce group is taking them out and dropping them off at your home whether you are primarily living there with your family or not you would need some sort of quarantine and sleeping arrangements specifically for these homeless animals. Does this mean if I live on the premises but have a dozen homeless animals Im fostering out back in kennels that I can also say the prime purpose is for people ? At what point are you recognised as a private foster carer or one attached to a welfare group? How do you get your foster dogs? Where are they rehomed from? the whole thing presented as you are interpreting this appears to be designed to deter people from becoming incorporated and operating professionally. Why bother bringing in the laws in the first place - how will they affect the RSPCA or Lost Dogs home except to make what they already do law so people cant sook about max time in care etc and decide not to donate? How is this going to clean up dodgy rescues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Assuming this goes ahead, rescuing dogs in Victoria is going to become a very expensive job. All establishments must carry a minimum of $10,000,000 Public Liability insurance cover. Not cheap. present the animal to a veterinary practitioner for a health assessment every seven days Also not cheap. And all the other stuff I can't be bothered picking out- operating a rescue is going to be almost impossible for smaller groups without much in the way of income. Foster carers conducting juvenile foster care for an establishment must:not allow animals kept on their premises to leave the premises unless returning them to the establishment; or for veterinary practitioner treatment I'm assuming this one means exactly as it sounds- and if that's the case, wtf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swingin Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Assuming this goes ahead, rescuing dogs in Victoria is going to become a very expensive job.All establishments must carry a minimum of $10,000,000 Public Liability insurance cover. Not cheap. present the animal to a veterinary practitioner for a health assessment every seven days Also not cheap. And all the other stuff I can't be bothered picking out- operating a rescue is going to be almost impossible for smaller groups without much in the way of income. Foster carers conducting juvenile foster care for an establishment must:not allow animals kept on their premises to leave the premises unless returning them to the establishment; or for veterinary practitioner treatment I'm assuming this one means exactly as it sounds- and if that's the case, wtf. When the points you mention are taken in context they make perfect sense. To isolate bits & pieces is a little careless when dealing with the facts. People should read the entire proposal before making a decsion on its worth. for e.g carer who undertakes foster care must have a written agreement with the establishment. Foster carers conducting juvenile foster care for an establishment must: •have the permits, where required by local government, to keep the number of animals at their premises •keep the animals in accordance with the instructions of the veterinary agreement •assess and record the weight and condition of the animal in their care on a daily basis •notify the establishment and present the animal to a veterinary practitioner if symptoms of illness develop •provide environmental enrichment and socialisation in accordance with the veterinary agreement•not allow animals kept on their premises to leave the premises unless returning them to the establishment; or for veterinary practitioner treatment •return the animals under foster care to the establishment within the specified time set by the veterinary practitioner or at the end of three months, whichever is sooner •permit their premises to be audited for compliance with the Act and Code by an authorised officer. Foster carers conducting veterinary or behavioural rehabilitation foster care for an establishment must:•be trained or experienced to care for and meet the needs of the animals placed in their care for rehabilitation •not have more animals requiring juvenile, veterinary or behavioural rehabilitation foster care, in their care at any one time, than they can singularly manage •have the permits, where required by local government, to keep the number of animals at their premises •record the condition of the animal in their care on a daily basis, and present this to the veterinary practitioner at least every seven days•present the animal to a veterinary practitioner for a health assessment every seven days •keep the records required by the Code and report to the operations manager on the condition of the animals as required by the Code on a weekly basis•permit their premises to be audited for compliance with the Act and Code by an authorised officer •return the animals under foster care to the establishment within the specified time set by the veterinary practitioner or at the end of three months, whichever is sooner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 Well for me much of how I will view this will pivot on: I'm being told that private rescue and foster carers will not be included in this. I'm assuming part of this is because some groups take the animal straight to the foster carers house rather than via an establishment for housing dogs first. Because there is no establishment [ shelter ] the animal would have to therefore be re homed from the foster carer's home. According to “The Bureau of Animal Welfare Bulletin 43 Under the Domestic Animals Act 1994 an animal shelter means any premises maintained for the purpose of providing shelter to, or finding new homes for stray, abandoned or unwanted dogs or cats. People who operate foster care, rescue clubs or pet rescue programs should be considered an animal shelter if their premises are maintained to keep these animals and find new homes for them. If these points of proof are met under this definition these premises must be considered a domestic animal business and must be registered by Council and operate in accord with the Code of Practice for the Management of Dogs and Cats in Shelters and Pounds. Now with breeding mandatory codes its very clear at what point a person who has a litter of puppies becomes a breeder and when they are covered by breeding mandatory code - when they need a licence and when they need planning approvals etc. My question is how many animals can that foster carer take over what period of time before the foster carer's home actually becomes the shelter? Or How is the mandatory code defining those who will and who will not be exempt and not required to operate under a mandatory code whilst they are still involved in the activity of providing shelter to and finding new homes for these animals ? and at what point does someone need a DAB Licence and planning issues cut in ? I have contacted the DPI and a couple of others who should have the answer at their finger tips and the answer will determine our response to this proposal and how we advise our members to ensure they remain within the law. I would rather know now who is and who is not exempt than wait until its all done and dusted and find out what people assumed isnt the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 O.K. Hang on I found this which seems to settle it all and answer the question. Consultation document – puppy farm legislation amendments Bureau of Animal Welfare Victoria 3 March 2011 30. The definition of an animal shelter is to be amended to mean a premises on which cats and dogs are kept and maintained for the purpose of rehousing. This is to exempt foster care and animal rescue volunteers keeping animals on their private residential premises in compliance with council planning provisions. 31. An amendment is required that defines a ‘community animal foster care organisation’ as an organisation that provides for the housing of cats and or dogs in private residential premises of a person approved by the organisation. 32. In addition an amendment is required that excludes a ‘community animal foster care organisation’ from the definition of an ‘animal shelter’. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anniek Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 O.K. Hang on I found this which seems to settle it all and answer the question. Consultation document – puppy farm legislation amendments Bureau of Animal Welfare Victoria 3 March 2011 30. The definition of an animal shelter is to be amended to mean a premises on which cats and dogs are kept and maintained for the purpose of rehousing. This is to exempt foster care and animal rescue volunteers keeping animals on their private residential premises in compliance with council planning provisions. 31. An amendment is required that defines a ‘community animal foster care organisation’ as an organisation that provides for the housing of cats and or dogs in private residential premises of a person approved by the organisation. 32. In addition an amendment is required that excludes a ‘community animal foster care organisation’ from the definition of an ‘animal shelter’. correct 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