Steve Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 But this isn't council. This seems to be, if accurate, the RSPCA. The RSPCA in SA dont have the same kind of powers they do YET in NSW and Victoria though its still a fair bit - but either way the RSPCA can only police and up hold what is law - they don't get to come in and announce their own policies and make everybody do as they do as they would like them to do. By the way this sort of thing is happening all over the place - You cant beat them when council joins in and places restrictions on what is required to run this sort of business from home - or any property - though if you had the money you probably could because many of the things they put on are not required via mandatory codes. But the RSPCA are coming in and putting their own policies on and people are too frightened to stand their ground. All of this is really important stuff especially as they are wanting to do inspections on breeders before they allow them licences and if any such thing came in for rescue they would want the job. Just because the RSPCA dont agree with no kill or dont think a dog should stay for longer than 2 months doesn't mean they get to call the shots on every other rescue group. Every person in this country should be calling for them to have an outside accountability process .They use our taxpayer money and public donations to do this and they are policing their competition or people they have a basic abhorrence to. Whether you agree with no kill or dogs staying longer than 2 months surely you can see that any situation where this can happen and if they dont comply they can simply take the dogs away is outrageous. They can come in take a dog , their own vet checks it over, no second opinion , no consultation with the owner or the owners vet , no accountability , put the dog down or simply rehome it and say what ever they want about the dog without any transparency the person they have taken it from has no defence and no where to go to be able to do anything to stop it. I know nothing about Lola or this shelter but this is much bigger than just this case and no matter what you cannot simply say its needed in this case and forget about it - this is much bigger than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Wouldn't it be more efficacious if council just adjusted the number of animals that Moorook can have on the premises at any time? That would address their "hoarding" concerns - and Moorook would have to increase it's adoption rates if it wished to continue as a shelter. Maybe I've simplified it too much, but it does seem like an answer to the hoarding claim... T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Wouldn't it be more efficacious if council just adjusted the number of animals that Moorook can have on the premises at any time? That would address their "hoarding" concerns - and Moorook would have to increase it's adoption rates if it wished to continue as a shelter. Maybe I've simplified it too much, but it does seem like an answer to the hoarding claim... T. Yes thats exactly the point. Any DA will say how many and in reality I think thats what everyone expects anyway - but once you get into how long they can stay thats a whole new ball game and not up to anyone but those who manage it .Different in Victoria because the RSPCA were able to get laws in to restrict these things but not in any other state so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeelerLove Posted April 10, 2013 Author Share Posted April 10, 2013 I think it's an interesting response from Moorook to say that Lola would rather close down completely than ever be responsible for euthanising a dog. Moorook posted a status not long ago saying they have euthanised dogs when quality of life was a concern. I believe this comment is in reference to the healthy, rehomable dogs that they receive. The two month thing would be in response to the unrehomable dogs she had out the back tucked away for years. It's just not ethical and her response shows she really puts her emotions before the welfare of the animals. I don't know how many 'unrehomable dogs she has tucked out the back', but the shelter is not only the shelter but also her property and home.. if she wants to have dogs of her own, why can't she? They may not be rehomable to other people but she may be able to manage them.. there are many people on DOL that have a large number of dogs, some that would be 'unrehomable' to other people, what makes her and them any different? It seems a lot of this has come up after the RSPCA decided they want to build a shelter in the riverland... interesting timing for the organisation that has never had any problems with Moorook in the past during their regular inspections to suddenly decide things are not good enough there. The working bee saw over 100 people attend the shelter. Most enclosures are now concreted, have new fences and gates and things have been cleaned up. There is another working bee being held soon to complete the rest of the work. Mark Aldridge posted an update after the one that Snook has quoted saying that "Loxton Council will come to the table and entertain an development plan, that allows for both increase in numbers and non kill status." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeelerLove Posted April 10, 2013 Author Share Posted April 10, 2013 A post from one of the pages against the RSPCA SA.. thought it was interesting. 4284 dogs and puppies were received by RSPCA SA from 01/07/11 to 30/06/12. Of that number, 2044 were reclaimed by their owners. Out of the remaining 2240, 899 were put down. That is 40%... that means that nearly half the dogs that were not reclaimed were euthanised. 65% of those 899 dogs and puppies were put to sleep due to behavioural problems. That is 593 dogs. 593 dogs in 12 months that were deemed to have too severe behavioural problems that they could not be rehabilitated and rehomed? That's an average of 1.6 dogs a day killed just for their behaviour. 3942 cats found themselves unlucky enough to be received by this organisation in the same period. If you take out the 125 that were reclaimed by their owners, 56% were euthanized. That is 2125 cats and kittens given the green dream. That’s an average of 177 a month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 BL, these unrehomeables weren't housepets they were dogs kept in kennels for years. Plenty of people have been there and seen them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 BL, these unrehomeables weren't housepets they were dogs kept in kennels for years. Plenty of people have been there and seen them. But then we get into the area of what constitutes a housepet. Plenty of breeders keep their 'housepets' in kennels with nary a complaint from various people on this forum. Why is it different for a householder or shelter who has kennels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheilaheel02 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 (edited) Just a comment about the two month restriction for dogs in care. A whole lot of amazing dogs that I have fostered would be dead today if this time limit became law. Especially if it is left open to interpretation of what is 'foster care' v's 'kennelled'. Unless I can confirm vaccination status the dogs are quarantined for a minimum of 10 days to begin with, so there is two weeks basically gone. Then the dogs are assessed over a period of time and their vet work needs to be completed etc - perhaps another 2-4 weeks. After that I would only have about a fortnight or so to find the 'perfect' home for that dog (which would include vetting the potential adopters, meet and greet, yard check etc etc). Granted the perfect home has sometimes been waiting or is available in that timeframe but it would be the rare exception rather than the rule. S Edited April 11, 2013 by Sheilaheel02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 No one should keep their dogs permanently in a kennel, no matter who they are, pet owner, breeder or rescue. Over night or some of the day is ok, but the dogs I'm talking about were permanent kennel residents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Moorook were only allowed to have 30 dogs at the shelter but it wasn't policed and blew out to over 100 dogs. Of course, the council is somewhat complicit in this because they continued to drop dogs off at Moorook despite Lola being over her permitted number. Although I still disagree with warehousing unrehomeable dogs until they die at least if she only had 30 dogs to contend with they could conceivably get the mental and physical stimulation they need to be happy in a kennelled situation. As I understand it from what I've read so far though, the RSPCA were still considering allowing Moorook to have high numbers of animals provided they met other conditions such as the concreting of kennels etc. This then brings it back to a question about what happens to the dogs she warehouses as they will then be missing out on what they need because there are so many other dogs to care for? How does that problem get solved? Well it shouldn't have had to be policed - if the approval is for 30 that's all there should have been without further applications for more approved. Im not going to comment on the advisability of having dogs indefinitely because a lot depends on the set up and how they are housed and managed but RSPCA and council in SA dont get to say how long a dog can stay on a property for that is being used as a shelter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 No one should keep their dogs permanently in a kennel, no matter who they are, pet owner, breeder or rescue. Over night or some of the day is ok, but the dogs I'm talking about were permanent kennel residents. Yeah well that's about how I feel about breeding dogs as well but the law says they can be and what's more they give codes which make it unavoidable. The way rescue is going there will be laws which will say how and how many and how long they can stay etc and when that happens its cases like this you can thank for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 It's appalling that the new direction is to force people to keep their breeding dogs in kennels when it's bloody obvious a small breeder can manage them in the house easily. I don't understand why it isn't obvious that the very thing that is supposed to make puppy farms better is really going to make them better and bigger. Puppy farmers will be laughing all the way to the bank. It will be interesting to see the outcome of Moorook from a legal point of view and hopefully laws won't be passed based on grudges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 It's appalling that the new direction is to force people to keep their breeding dogs in kennels when it's bloody obvious a small breeder can manage them in the house easily. I don't understand why it isn't obvious that the very thing that is supposed to make puppy farms better is really going to make them better and bigger. Puppy farmers will be laughing all the way to the bank. It will be interesting to see the outcome of Moorook from a legal point of view and hopefully laws won't be passed based on grudges. Well, that's altogether too likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 One reason I'm fleeing SA, it's no picnic here, everyone is connected, especially in the animal world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 One reason I'm fleeing SA, it's no picnic here, everyone is connected, especially in the animal world. In rescue or in general? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 In general as well, the place isn't a country town but it behaves like one. It's like two degrees of separation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 It's appalling that the new direction is to force people to keep their breeding dogs in kennels when it's bloody obvious a small breeder can manage them in the house easily. I don't understand why it isn't obvious that the very thing that is supposed to make puppy farms better is really going to make them better and bigger. Puppy farmers will be laughing all the way to the bank. It will be interesting to see the outcome of Moorook from a legal point of view and hopefully laws won't be passed based on grudges. Well, that's altogether too likely. Yes agreed and they have some powerful groups and people on their side including the AVA - much going on behind the scenes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 In general as well, the place isn't a country town but it behaves like one. It's like two degrees of separation! Dont think you will avoid that by moving to another state - the dog world is a filthy place and is a small world no matter where you live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Yep, I think it will improve, the 36 years I spent in QLD was nothing like this :laugh: I think it's the isolation, there are so many crazies here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Yep, I think it will improve, the 36 years I spent in QLD was nothing like this :laugh: I think it's the isolation, there are so many crazies here! crazies everywhere Jo especially in the dog world and it has gotten worse over the last few years. 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