What Is The Story With The New Temperament Assessments At Blacktown Po

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

There is still a concern that some dogs - such as the breed I rescue - can't pass a test such as the RSPCA's and will be euth'd for being timid.

I hope that the council will apply some common sense.

For instance, the tests done in the DAS pound are well done and very helpful when making a rescue decision.

[_PL_]

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing": Edmund Burke, political philosopher (1729 - 1797).

I'm choking on the irony of that quote. Now a pound is doing 'something', PR will do 'nothing'. What a massive tanty.

I've no sympathy for a group who has bullied and badgered so many.

I'll leave out the vicious personal attacks levelled at us as individuals. But most people aren't aware that Melanie Norman registered and Incorporated the name of Pound List (and all possible versions of the domain name) so it couldn't be used here on DOL as it had been for years on behalf of the dogs impounded - with no personal gain and largely anonymously.

Why? All because we gave her a hard time about altering temp notes and using vols photos to scab money with while other groups took the dogs in. PR now disagrees with a pound trying to get a little control back on what happens to their dogs? Funny about that. Or are they disagreeing with not being able to leave dogs sitting there for weeks and weeks while a big plea is run on FB?

This has been coming for a long time and we're fortunate there hasn't been a harsher measure taken that makes rescuing almost impossible. 5 unrehomeable dogs PTS in such a high intake pound is still "No Kill" in the true meaning. How dare they use those 5 lives as a power play.

Edited March 17, 2013 by Powerlegs

[juice]

Bottom line is the testing, if its bad alot of dogs will die for no reason , some on breed alone, cattle dogs don't test well in a pound either.

if its done well, with breed understanding its a good thing.

PR stepping away is a good thing .

[Nic.B]

I agree with assessing but some breeds present very poorly in a pound environment.

Is there discretion on a per dog basis or a straight out red mark against the dog? What are they testing for exactly?

I am not familiar with BCC Anna though at HP most things are taken into consideration and unless the dog has done something serious they are given a chance to settle and perhaps be assesed. If the dog does not improve/shuts down the dog is independantly assesed prior to release. The person who independantly assess these dogs puts their name to that dog for life (similar to breed assesors)the liability (and insurance) also changes from council to the assesor.

I can only speak of my experiences though there are many breed traights to take into consideration when temp testing.

For example we always tested Greys extensively with dogs of all size/different breeds etc, along with the cats. And if you ask a grey to "sit" you will be waiting for a very long time :laugh:

Some breeds may be more aloof/or appear independant (shar pei comes to mind)

All dogs have different thresholds, they are all individual. Some may have been there for a day, some for 3 weeks, some may be repeat offenders, the pound for some dogs is the best home they have ever had.

If you asked me, it would come down to counciuls ONLY releasing to reputable groups who ALWAYS put the welfare of the animal first and formost. Despite that at times very difficult decisions need to be made or you are setting dogs and familes up for failure.

Sadly, things have changed via one group in particular. Councils are now forced to try and cover themselves, that in turn has impacted upon goodness knows how many dogs and an endless number of really ethical rescues

Sorry about spelling, I am running from here to the horses!

[_PL_]

Ta Nic, from the FB letter you posted I kind of got the idea that dogs being tested were the ones with no rescue/EOI. It would be impossible to test everyone. I do hope there is flexibility. You're spot on about Shar Pei, that kind of breed specific trait is what I'm concerned about.

And your spelling is fine :laugh:

Edited March 17, 2013 by Powerlegs

[Nic.B]

There is still a concern that some dogs - such as the breed I rescue - can't pass a test such as the RSPCA's and will be euth'd for being timid.

I hope that the council will apply some common sense.

For instance, the tests done in the DAS pound are well done and very helpful when making a rescue decision.

Yes, that is the sadest part for the dogs and for rescue Jane. For years and years rescue, breed rescue or specificly geared rescue for different sizes, ages etc and shelter staff worked well and responsibly to rehabilitate, rehome or even pts a tiny number dogs if needed.

MN has just recreated the "them and US" approach, pounds and shelters v's rescuers, what a fool. What does she hope to achieve for dogs by dividing rescue groups, pounds and shelters?

I have witnessed SO MANY dogs (breed/age or other related) who not only deserved a chance via a specific rescue who met every single need, most of those dogs were given that as they were placed into the right hands. 95% moved into incredible homes.

[Steve]

Good Question Steve.

I don't want to get overly involved, though I do believe temp testing is vital. I guess for me it depends on what the test entails and how experienced/savy the handlers are.

I do believe AWL's temp test is very tough and difficult to pass, I have not done it myself though so don't know for sure.

For me though (if I were in councils shoes) EVERYTHING would depend upon the group I sent that dog to. If there was proof, written statements and reports of dead dogs, children attacked, dogs impounded in other states, The rescue groups council ALREADY work with being consistently asked to take another groups dogs etc etc. For me it a no brainer.

At times (when I was temp testing at HP) I would go back to the same dogs three or four times. I do believe the dogs need to "settle for 48 hours in the pound environment prior to temp testing.

You also need to remain neutral and be 100% honest!

The same issues surfaced for HP due to the same group. Dogs with any 'red flags' are now independantly assesed.

The sad part is ethical rescuers did at times take dogs with medical or behavioural issues for many, many years. Though these rescues were brilliant, and the outcome was reported back to council (rehabilitae/pts) They made the hard call and were 100% responsible. Pr's do not opperate ethicaly, I wish for one moment they would stop and realise what they have created.

MN states that they dont take HA dogs. The number of bites and attacks on children, vets, vet nurses and even their own pr's volunteers show differently.

ETA 4th paragraph.

But dont they rel;ease dogs to anyone who asks for it - not just groups?

[Nic.B]

Bottom line is the testing, if its bad alot of dogs will die for no reason , some on breed alone, cattle dogs don't test well in a pound either.

if its done well, with breed understanding its a good thing.

PR stepping away is a good thing .

I agree 100% with you Juice, very sadly pr's are not capable of responsibly temp testing dogs they broker for sale/adoption nor do they have any experience. They offer no support or guidence for adopting owners.

So they want pound staff to do the work (or more than likely NOT!) and Pr's cash in with an adoption fee. IMO MN is saying to staff and council, you temp test, you work with and pay for behavioural intervention and then hold the dog until I say so, otherwise I will sue you and call the media.

Meanwhile she has just pulled in $$$$$ with her emotive and manipulative posts for a dog she most often does not take into her own care!

[Nic.B]

Good Question Steve.

I don't want to get overly involved, though I do believe temp testing is vital. I guess for me it depends on what the test entails and how experienced/savy the handlers are.

I do believe AWL's temp test is very tough and difficult to pass, I have not done it myself though so don't know for sure.

For me though (if I were in councils shoes) EVERYTHING would depend upon the group I sent that dog to. If there was proof, written statements and reports of dead dogs, children attacked, dogs impounded in other states, The rescue groups council ALREADY work with being consistently asked to take another groups dogs etc etc. For me it a no brainer.

At times (when I was temp testing at HP) I would go back to the same dogs three or four times. I do believe the dogs need to "settle for 48 hours in the pound environment prior to temp testing.

You also need to remain neutral and be 100% honest!

The same issues surfaced for HP due to the same group. Dogs with any 'red flags' are now independantly assesed.

The sad part is ethical rescuers did at times take dogs with medical or behavioural issues for many, many years. Though these rescues were brilliant, and the outcome was reported back to council (rehabilitae/pts) They made the hard call and were 100% responsible. Pr's do not opperate ethicaly, I wish for one moment they would stop and realise what they have created.

MN states that they dont take HA dogs. The number of bites and attacks on children, vets, vet nurses and even their own pr's volunteers show differently.

ETA 4th paragraph.

But dont they rel;ease dogs to anyone who asks for it - not just groups?

I just spent ages replying Julie and it is gone. Maybe it was removed? Can Troy help?

I will be out now for a few hours at least.

[Cosmolo]

While i understand the concern regarding inappropriate temp testing and certain tests used in pounds and shelters horrify me, i strongly enourage people to not throw all assessments into the same baskets and make generalisations about how you can't assess in a pound environment. Actually you can have a very good success rate with the right skills, training, test and attitude.

I am actually quite sick of pounds releasing dogs and having no responsibility for what happens after that. Just yesterday i spoke to someone (not even a client!) who adopted a 45kg dog from a pound who is both dog aggressive and predatory with livestock. They gave this dog to a lady who is not physically strong enough to handle him, who wants a sociable dog AND has horses.. It's about time the pounds took releasing dogs ALOT more seriously. It has little to do with legal action and EVERYTHING to do with being responsible for both the dogs and people in the community.

[Malti]

If pound rounds were true in any of their meanings they would continue to work with a pound even though the pound does not do as they are dictated to by the 16D holder. Instead they will not help a rehomeable dog that might be in Blacktown. That is a direct contradiction to their 'philosophy' but in direct correlation to what occurs when everyone that does not bow down to them and their subsequent attacks that will just be starting on Blacktown Pound.

Temperament assessments are not perfect, but pounds do have some responsibility to make a decision, once a dog comes into their pound and assessed as a risk if released. Hopefully they will recognise responsible rescues and work closely with them in some decisions, especially breed specific issues.

Pound rounds had no discretion in pulling any and all dogs out, nor in any consequence of who they gave the dogs to. I do wonder if this temperament test was implemented because of one or many incidences that have occurred with pound round released dogs.

[Malti]

Off pound rounds FB page again

Statement from Animal Welfare League NSW CEO Tim Vasudeva

AWL NSW is aware of some misinformation which is currently being distributed by social media and other means in relation to AWL and Blacktown Council Animal Holding Facility.

To clarify the facts of the matter: AWL was recently approached by Blacktown Council with a request to assist them in providing training for their shelter staff and volunteers to better understand dog and cat behaviour, and to allow them to progress the development of their own training protocols for staff and volunteers and their own behavioural assessment and rehabilitation programs.

We provided Blacktown with guidance regarding training courses for staff and volunteers, and have provided detailed information regarding AWL’s own behavioural assessments and rehabilitation protocols which have made a significant contribution to the dramatic increase in rehoming rates at AWL’s three Sydney shelters.

Consistent with its commitment to rehome all healthy or medically / behaviourally treatable animal, AWL have worked very hard on behalf of the animals that come into our care each year, and have improved rehoming rates significantly to 83% of all shelter animals this year, up from less than 50% two years ago. Of the 17% euthansia rate for the current year, approximately half are for medical reasons and half for behaviour reasons. This has been a concerted effort on the part of every member of our Veterinary, Behaviour, Shelter, Foster Care and Volunteer teams. Please also bear in mind that AWL mostly takes in owner-surrendered animals, so unlike pound facilities our reclaim rate for lost animals being returned to owners from our shelters is basically zero.

AWL is happy to provide support to Blacktown Pound in their efforts to provide better training to their staff and volunteers to understand animal behaviour, however as part of that support AWL will not be conducting formal assessments of Blacktown Pound animals and all decisions regarding the rehoming or non-rehoming of Blacktown Pound animals continue to remain with Blacktown Council and their staff. We would continue to encourage Blacktown Council to employ a qualified Behaviourist or Behavioural Trainer to manage and oversee the training and assessment programs put in place for their animals.

AWL has a long history of supporting other animal welfare organisations where we are able to assist. In the case of Blacktown Council Pound this included the formal presentations made by myself and Dr Rob Zammitt to the May 2012 Blacktown City Council meeting on behalf of AWL NSW, RSPCA NSW and a significant number of local veterinarians which resulted in Council voting to introduce compulsory desexing of animals released from Blacktown Pound. More recently we have been holding discussions with Blacktown City Councillors in conjunction with RSPCA NSW in an effort to provide regular low-cost desexing capacity to pet owners of low socio-economic means in the Blacktown area.

AWL will continue to assist other rescue and welfare organisations and their animals where we are able to.

Tim Vasudeva

Chief Executive Officer

[Bonniebank]

Haven't read this thread entirely yet.

I received this link via Facebook (animal cruelty causes) and thought I'd come here to get the 'non-hyped up, non-hysterical' version of what's happening.

Some people on Facebook saying they will support PR in this, may be unaware of every aspect of this issue

[Katdogs]

Tim V sounds very sensible there. What a contrast to the other.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

Tim V sounds very sensible there. What a contrast to the other.

Quite right, I'd never accuse Tim of writing utter drivel, unlike PR who use words to try and confuse and put people off track.

Gosh, you'd be furious if it looked like the wheels were coming off your gravy train, wouldn't you? :)

Edited March 17, 2013 by dogmad

[sas]

I think it's bloody brilliant and long over due. Too many rescues are taking dogs out of pounds that should not end up with inexperienced foster carers or the general public.

I got sick of people attacking us (GDRR NSW) for not taking Danes and Dane x's because their temperament was not suitable to us / our carers / general public, get sick of hearing you can't test a dogs temperament in a pound environment...you 100% can. It's time excuses stopped and rescues such as PR's are stopped dead in their tracks, they make us look bad and the general public won't trust us anymore.

I cannot stand PR's way of dealing with things....

http://www.gumtree.c...ogs-/1016105620

Edited March 17, 2013 by sas

[ozsomerset]

Can i suggest letter of support to blacktown pound, so if this does go to the general manager,mayor or Councillors then they can show that the majority of rescue support them

[Nic.B]

Good Question Steve.

I don't want to get overly involved, though I do believe temp testing is vital. I guess for me it depends on what the test entails and how experienced/savy the handlers are.

I do believe AWL's temp test is very tough and difficult to pass, I have not done it myself though so don't know for sure.

For me though (if I were in councils shoes) EVERYTHING would depend upon the group I sent that dog to. If there was proof, written statements and reports of dead dogs, children attacked, dogs impounded in other states, The rescue groups council ALREADY work with being consistently asked to take another groups dogs etc etc. For me it a no brainer.

At times (when I was temp testing at HP) I would go back to the same dogs three or four times. I do believe the dogs need to "settle for 48 hours in the pound environment prior to temp testing.

You also need to remain neutral and be 100% honest!

The same issues surfaced for HP due to the same group. Dogs with any 'red flags' are now independantly assesed.

The sad part is ethical rescuers did at times take dogs with medical or behavioural issues for many, many years. Though these rescues were brilliant, and the outcome was reported back to council (rehabilitae/pts) They made the hard call and were 100% responsible. Pr's do not opperate ethicaly, I wish for one moment they would stop and realise what they have created.

MN states that they dont take HA dogs. The number of bites and attacks on children, vets, vet nurses and even their own pr's volunteers show differently.

ETA 4th paragraph.

But dont they rel;ease dogs to anyone who asks for it - not just groups?

I can only speak for HP though there is a huge difference between adopting a dog and pulling that dog out via rescue.

Adopting families are asked to bring in the whole family, including dog/dogs if they have them. They are asked if they have a cat/small animals. Asked about fencing, how much time they have to offer the dog etc.

The intros are extensive with the family, children and other dogs. If they have a cat/small animals dogs are tested with the cats. A lot of advice is also offered ie; creating a safe place for cats, supervison with other dogs/children etc.

Training issues were identified, a months free training is offered, we also showed the family simple effective training techniques and what motivated the dog. A free health check is offered with local vets etc. There is a lot of support and information.

If a dog is pulled out via rescue/under clause these checks are bypassed as ethical rescues will meet all of the above and more prior to placing a dog.

For me the issue always has been working with reputable groups who will ensure the dogs needs are met and the families who choose to adopt. If there is evidence of an unreputable group, councils have a duty of care and responsibility both to the dogs in their care and the community.

[Nic.B]

I would be very suprised if BCC backed down on the decision they have made to temp test. Aside from being threatened and bullied, surely a decision to reverse temp testing would leave them wide open if anything did go terribly wrong?

What they need to do is focus on working with groups who ARE ethical and reputable.

I do agree that the type of temp test used is very important. Underdogs temp test is fantastic and very effective. Temp testers also need to know what they are doing, and look at each dog individualy.

There are so many important issues, it is a mine feild

[_PL_]

I wonder how many keyboard warriors showed up at the 9am protest.