N A R G A

[yellowgirl]

They appear to have a fair few FB pages, could be more I just did a quick search

Narga Forums

Narga Foster Care Training

Narga Network Partners

Is that the page linked above, why do they need two FB pages, have they been to the MN marketing techniques seminars :laugh:

The first link I provided, MN herself.

Although quite a few anti PR names in there as well so IDK what the go is.

Not trying to make this another PR thread though so that's all from me :)

I don't think that would be right at all Gertrude. MN would not be involved with NARGA.

[Gertrude139]

They appear to have a fair few FB pages, could be more I just did a quick search

Narga Forums

Narga Foster Care Training

Narga Network Partners

Is that the page linked above, why do they need two FB pages, have they been to the MN marketing techniques seminars :laugh:

The first link I provided, MN herself.

Although quite a few anti PR names in there as well so IDK what the go is.

Not trying to make this another PR thread though so that's all from me :)

I don't think that would be right at all Gertrude. MN would not be involved with NARGA.

I agree something is definitely not right! She is posting in there so.....

ETA - It's kind of hard to miss her with her PR profile pic

Edited February 17, 2013 by Gertrude139

[yellowgirl]

For individuals I can see the benefit of having your hobby etc on a page separate to your name account, but why not just keep everything together if you are an organisation. People can still post on the wall of the main page.

I imagine it's because they have several different and diverse areas of interest, so a page for each subject makes sense.

All I want to know is.. will PR/STARS be allowed to join Narga?

You should ask them H.A. That's a real tricky one. If the group is open for everyone to join, who gets to say that someone can't join if it's an open membership? If they answer the survey, whether truthful or not, who's to say they can't have their stars and their membership if they've answered the questions? Geeze, that's a tricky one. Glad I'm not on the committee.

I do know of a rescue support group that has temporarily terminated the membership of one particular rescue group due to the amount of complaints coming in. They're conducting their own investigation into the allegations and the group won't be listed in the meantime.

Edited February 17, 2013 by yellowgirl

[Little Gifts]

I still have an issue with a group calling themselves a national body. I would need to see representation on their management committee from every single state and those representatives would need to be respected members of their state's rescue community.

I would've rather they put forth a proposal to key rescue groups around the country to form a national body and then called for reps from each state to form the committee rather than just suddenly be professing they were a national but faceless/nameless body. It's not the way to garner support or determine common values and goals for the group. It's a cheerocracy, not a democracy!

I also don't know what lobbying experience they have and whether they appreciate the difficulty and cost associated with being a national body. Are they going to skype members into meetings? If these members have other jobs how free will they be to fly to various activities and who will pay for flights and accom? Whose going to administrate what they are doing and ensure everyone is kept up to date and identify papers and submit responses? Besides practical rescue knowledge are any of the reps qualified in any useful way? Are there policy writers, porject managers, legal eagles or public relations people? Does anyone have any actual connections to political or media networks? Or are these just good hearted people with their fingers crossed?

I strongly believe in people power but really, really don't understand how they are going to achieve many of their goals without key supporters, money and people with lobbying skills. They are thinking way too big without much to back it up.

[mita]

Follow the evidence. Good on you Gertrude for looking for actual information.

For those who received the letter from NARGA, you had the start of a track to follow. A person signed it. So there was a name to follow & that can be googled to find a profile.

And in there, are the groups the person is associated with. One is a kind-hearted & very well organised rescue in a country area (& rightly respected in their locality). Caring, decent people who make considerable effort on behalf of companion animals.

But this motto appears on their page: [Don't breed or buy while homeless pets die. Familiar? That's the animal rights-oriented, generalised anti-breeder sentiment. Naive, because it overlooks evidence that all breeding does not lead to dumping.

The 'belief' from which NARGA proceeds is towards animal rights. Kind-hearted towards animals, but ideological. So its view of 'rescue' is in that context.

Rescues have to ask themselves if that's what they want to sign up to? The animal rights approach can put a wedge between rescue & registered breeders. Which, in a more-informed context, shouldn't exist. The efforts of 'good' registered breeders prevent dumping of dogs... & there are breed rescues, as well as cooperation among good breeders and many rescue groups.

Rescues also have another issue. With the name of the organisation suggesting a national representation of rescue groups... those who don't subscribe to its approach would need to differentiate themselves.

Easiest solution would be if NARGA put on its website & ID material, the list of rescues that are members. So it's clear just who they say they're speaking on behalf of, when they speak on 'rescue' matters. And it wouldn't be every rescue in this nation.

But with an association that doesn't put the names of their steering committee on their website (yet), I wouldn't hold my breath. But they might.

Kind hearted, decent, well-intentioned, but naive. I agree with Aphra (whose post was a breath of fresh air), more sophistication & wider representation are required to represent the pointy end of rescue.

But the choice is up to individual rescuers ... I'm not their mother or their maid. Find the information & make up your own mind to join or not. Easy for me.... I dip out at the start. Wouldn't join a non-democratically formed group to represent 'my' views.

Little Gifts, excellent post!

Edited February 17, 2013 by mita

[Maddy]

For individuals I can see the benefit of having your hobby etc on a page separate to your name account, but why not just keep everything together if you are an organisation. People can still post on the wall of the main page.

I imagine it's because they have several different and diverse areas of interest, so a page for each subject makes sense.

All I want to know is.. will PR/STARS be allowed to join Narga?

You should ask them H.A. That's a real tricky one. If the group is open for everyone to join, who gets to say that someone can't join if it's an open membership? If they answer the survey, whether truthful or not, who's to say they can't have their stars and their membership if they've answered the questions? Geeze, that's a tricky one. Glad I'm not on the committee.

I do know of a rescue support group that has temporarily terminated the membership of one particular rescue group due to the amount of complaints coming in. They're conducting their own investigation into the allegations and the group won't be listed in the meantime.

Yeah.. I think until I get further information, I won't be joining. A CoE for members would at least reduce the risk of ending up associated with dodgy groups.

[Katdogs]

OT but Mita I love your brain :)

[tdierikx]

OT but Mita I love your brain :)

I'll definitely second that! Always the voice of reason and logic - even in debates with contentious issues. Love your work mita!

T.

[Steve]

Again Im not supporting this group.

Problem is a quick look around would seem to suggest that its common in the rescue and activist lobby groups area for associations not to have such information on their websites anyway especially when they are relatively new. I would have had different thoughts on Oscars law when it first started if it had that sort of info more obviously positioned and you have to look pretty hard to find this sort of info on another group which is basically set up for similar purposes as NARGA too. This hasn't prevented them from gathering loads of support and heaps of donated money and sponsorship - and having a very effective voice and running a good campaign for united rescue groups at government level.

This whole I wont join if ............. is a member is the reason why anyone trying to set up a group which gives a united voice for rescue and attempts to set standards will always be pushing it all up hill. Most groups do not publish a list of their members anyway.

If they are going to make decisions based on what is popular or what one group or other or what person or other has to say rather than policy and principals its going to be interesting to watch.

[Aphra]

I three admiration for Mita's cool good sense and intellect!

Problem is a quick look around would seem to suggest that its common in the rescue and activist lobby groups area for associations not to have such information on their websites anyway especially when they are relatively new. I would have had different thoughts on Oscars law when it first started if it had that sort of info more obviously positioned and you have to look pretty hard to find this sort of info on another group which is basically set up for similar purposes as NARGA too. This hasn't prevented them from gathering loads of support and heaps of donated money and sponsorship - and having a very effective voice and running a good campaign for united rescue groups at government level.

I have to disagree with you here Steve, although I do appreciate your even-handed approach. :-) The Oscar's Law campaign is a single-issue campaign. Deb Tranter said "this is what we want, if you want it too, join us" and built Oscar's Law very effectively from the grassroots level. But from the very beginning Oscar's Law has been clear about their purpose. And agree with Deb Tranter or not, she has been campaigning against puppy farms for decades, she has the reputation and experience in the field to lead such a campaign.

However, NARGA are quite different. They are making some big claims.

From NARGA's letter. "We expect to become part of every submission, focus group, symposium or public consultation regarding the welfare of companion animals and the people who rescue them."

This is not a campaign, this is representation, quite a different thing. If someone claims they are going to speak on my behalf, then it is important that I know who those people are, what their experience and skill level is, what their level of understanding of the field is and that I am in broad agreement with what they are going to say to in those submissions and consultations.

I write a blog about rescue which has an audience of about ten people on a good day, but I make sure I can substantiate any figures or statistics I use when I publish ... so I would expect a group which intends to speak on my behalf to be at least as careful about making sure they are publishing facts and not just an emotional stance. Particularly when their source is PETA who have a higher kill rate for companion animals than the Lost Dogs Home.

I'm not opposed to animal rights, I've been a vegetarian on ethical grounds for over 20 years and a fan of Peter Singer for at least that long. The anti-breeder mentality is one stream of animal activism, driven out of PETA's nihilistic stance on companion animals. But beyond that, there are no figures or evidence at all that registered breeders are a significant contributor to the numbers of animals in pounds, and demonising them is just another way of ignoring the real issues in favour of emotive slogans.

From NARGA's letter. The Hearts Reward System will give groups something to strive towards. .

Frankly, I think that far from being something to strive toward, the Heart Reward System is a bare minimum and one that doesn't make much sense anyway. It is also really disrespectful of people like Maree, who as she said earlier in the thread, has been rescuing for 12 years and does know what she is doing. But NARGA are representing themselves as a peak body able to mentor and develop other rescuers, without any evidence at all that they have the ability to do so. There is much for us all to learn, and every year I look back and think how much I've learned about rescue in that time and how much there is still to learn, but if someone is going to claim that they can improve what we do I want to know who they are.

From NARGA's letter. We intend to encourage cooperation, cohesion and conversation amongst rescue groups (large and small), pounds and shelters to develop large cooperative networks in the rescue community - from transport, foster carer, and volunteer networks right through to food bank and other resource networks.

This one made me particularly stabby. It's a myth that rescues don't work together and that it's all back-biting and bitching. I've been rescuing with other groups and now with our own group for a decade or so, and in that time have made lots of terrific connections with other rescues. We work co-operatively with a lot of other groups and we do share resources, including donations and transport. This finger wagging thing that someone like NARGA has to come in and force us to play nice is making me very cranky.

This is just one example from a recent blog post of ours, but that's pretty much business as usual for rescue groups all over the country. http://www.headingfo...life-of-rescue/

From NARGA's letter. We want to work with the rescue community to implement legislated Codes of Practice for rescue groups and rehoming organisations. We will also work towards implementing a nationally recognised foster carer training package.

Given the shoddy legislation around animal welfare currently in place in Victoria, I think legislation around rescue will be the death knell for private rescues. I do think a generally agreed code of practice for groups would be useful, but DRAV are already working on that in Victoria.

This whole I wont join if ............. is a member is the reason why anyone trying to set up a group which gives a united voice for rescue and attempts to set standards will always be pushing it all up hill. Most groups do not publish a list of their members anyway.

I don't agree Steve (again!). I think there is considerable scope for some collaborative work across rescue groups, but it has to come from the ground up and be developed as collaborative, inclusive process.

The way to have begun this business would have been to begin with an email to every rescue group inviting them to participate in a conversation about what rescue needs on a state-by-state basis. There are any number of online tools which would make this entirely possible. From there people could have been invited to join an organisation and nominate known represenatives to the committee. That way the values and body of work would be decided by those who are being represented.

In the normal course of events, I wouldn't care what NARGA did and would be happy to leave them to their own devices. But I believe that as the profile of the companion animal issue and rescue, are achieving a higher profile internationally, the next couple of years will be a watershed for rescue. What I don't want to happen is for a group like NARGA to become the mouthpiece for rescue based on their own say-so.

If a group is going to represent thousands of rescuers, foster carers and volunteers then I want that group to have the commitment to collaboration; deep understanding of the field; intellectual rigor; political savvy; innovative approach and professional standards to do so well.

[Lollipup]

I know who started this group and having met her, if I were a rescue group I would stay away. Well meaning and nice people but that's not enough.

Edited February 18, 2013 by Lollipup

[Steve]

Aphra - on your points of why not to join and why be concerned I 100% agree - however, over the last 10 years Ive watched while numerous groups have started and stopped almost over night .

I just think the fact they are trying is one good point in their favour that's all.

There are several groups including DRAV who arent putting the kind of details out that is being asked of this group and I believe they did do much work with lots of success in the last elections and last update of laws in Victoria in representing small rescue. The outcome affected their own group and all other rescue in Victoria.

[Greytmate]

If a group is going to represent thousands of rescuers, foster carers and volunteers then I want that group to have the commitment to collaboration; deep understanding of the field; intellectual rigor; political savvy; innovative approach and professional standards to do so well.

That's the important thing, otherwise they could do more harm than good if they come across as the Crazy Dog Lady Brigade. It would be interesting to see who the committee members are, if anyone can publish the list here when it is revealed.

I found from my own experiences in trying to effect legislative change that I had to collaborate with and gain the trust of some very high achieving and powerful people. There would be little point in having a committee of 18 people unless in contained some that are regarded as leaders in their professional field.

[Are You Serious Jo]

Wouldn't surprise me if greylvr turned up on the committee.

[Little Gifts]

Aphra - on your points of why not to join and why be concerned I 100% agree - however, over the last 10 years Ive watched while numerous groups have started and stopped almost over night .

I just think the fact they are trying is one good point in their favour that's all.

There are several groups including DRAV who arent putting the kind of details out that is being asked of this group and I believe they did do much work with lots of success in the last elections and last update of laws in Victoria in representing small rescue. The outcome affected their own group and all other rescue in Victoria.

Julie I agree with the concept of people giving it a go because it does only take one person to start change (as evidenced by Oscar's Law) but I still can't accept a couple of people calling themselves a national body representing all. It is naive and potentially dangerous to the whole rescue industry. I appreciate that it is safer for smaller groups to not detail who individuals are but for a national body there needs to be a figure head and we need to be able to see some evidence of the skills within the organisation simply to show evidence of their capabilities to do what they are proposing. Having many years of working in the state govt I can tell you that lobby groups without some legitimacy are not taken seriously, they are not kept informed about issues and they are not invited to offer representation or provide submissions. State based key bodies are considered legitimate (based on their professional approach and knowledge/industry influence) and get meetings with Ministers, can affect policy/politics, etc but national key organisations have to deal with the federal govt and are considered to sit over key state bodies, many of which need to network or have membership with the national key organisations. Does that make sense? If we had some self appointed local group writing to us claiming to be a new national body they would probably get the run around unless they had a local or federal MP assisting them. People can't just go around professing to be something without proof or a track record of the individuals and get taken seriously within govt.

Instead of talking about our concerns here should we be sharing these with NARGA? I hate raining on anyone's parade but from a govt perspective They need to make a lot of organisational changes to be able to get off the starting block. Maybe they are capable of it but at present we don't have enough knowledge about them to know. I wouldn't want to discourage or bad mouth them unesecarily if the capacity exists and we just don't know it yet.

Edited February 18, 2013 by Little Gifts

[tdierikx]

NARGA members do read what's going on here on DOL... I got slammed on FB for putting forward my views when the topic first came up...

Not the best way to convince me that I want to join them... *sigh*

T.

[Aphra]

I have tried to make raise these issues with NARGA, most recently when we received the letter of invitation - I sent them a list of questions, but received no answer. Given that the president requests only texts and not phone calls, it's not all that easy to ask any questions.

Instead of talking about our concerns here should we be sharing these with NARGA? I hate raining on anyone's parade but from a govt perspective They need to make a lot of organisational changes to be able to get off the starting block. Maybe they are capable of it but at present we don't have enough knowledge about them to know. I wouldn't want to discourage or bad mouth them unesecarily if the capacity exists and we just don't know it yet.

[Just Andrea]

I have received a second letter of invitation to join them last week. I sent them a reply which is unlikely to see them contacting me again.

There is too little known about them for me to consider any affiliation. As someone else has said, I am too busy doing real rescue, and don't have the time required to investigate them fully, and I shouldn't have to.

If I am still not clear how they operate and what they are about then how can they purport to represent my interests.

Most of us have earnt what reputations we have and should exercise care with whom we associate ourselves.

Edited February 18, 2013 by Just Andrea

[Jingle Bells]

My link

Does anyone in rescue know anything about these peeps?

14 Managers! Seriously?

What exactly do they do?

[_PL_]

They did send a lengthy email to lots of rescuers asking for backup on the Moorook issue. I guess they were involved in advocacy for that shelter.