Rspca's New Call For Donations

[Guest donatella]

No that's fine, its interesting to hear different views.

What upsets me is their keenness to just put dogs down. There are loads of stories about them euthing pups for stupid reasons (dog aggressive at a few weeks old).

I do support them for the cruelty case work they do, but their rescue/rehoming side needs a lot of working on (IMO).

[mita]

We support both AWL Qld & RSPCA Qld. There's differences in roles for both.

In regard to Tibetan Spaniels, RSPCA Qld's been good. When a couple of Tibbies were overwhelmed by (separate) shelter conditions, they let them go to 2 excellent small breed rescues. Where they thrived in domestic settings with dogs of their own kind. And found just the right forever homes. Both purebred. Some shelters put high prices on dogs like these ( can't blame them... it's like 'market value'). But these dogs were dealt with, for their best interests.

I also find their Behaviour & Training Unit's Hotline very helpful & understanding re both dogs & cats. I've put quite a few people on to them.

Everyone can make up their own mind & also consider there are state differences.

[Aphra]

All of the state and territory RSPCAs operate differently, in fact each individual RSPCA within states and territories can be quite different. Victoria, for example, has much better save rates than NSW overall, but there are some lovely examples of how corporate profit making overtake their mission statement (http://www.bendigoweekly.com/news/ducking-the-real-issue). This same RSPCA manager regularly kills adoptable pets with minor issues because "I want quality, not quantity, in my shelter".

My major issue with the RSPCA and the reason why I refuse to support it, is the complete lack of accountability - no-one has oversight of the RSPCA's actions and decisions, except through the courts. There is no process for appeal or review.

And I think their willingness to take money from the pork industry, the poultry industry and in NSW the PIAA is a terrible example of conflict of interest. To be making money out of groups you might need to investigates casts doubt over all of the RSPCA's actions, in my opinion.

[Curlybert]

Everyone can make up their own mind & also consider there are state differences.

Quite right. Canberra's RSPCA has a good reputation. And I saw the CEO at the 'Ban Live Export' march on Sunday, walking his pretty pit bull girl.

[mita]

Everyone can make up their own mind & also consider there are state differences.

Quite right. Canberra's RSPCA has a good reputation. And I saw the CEO at the 'Ban Live Export' march on Sunday, walking his pretty pit bull girl.

Now that cheers my heart.

[Dame Aussie]

All of the state and territory RSPCAs operate differently, in fact each individual RSPCA within states and territories can be quite different. Victoria, for example, has much better save rates than NSW overall, but there are some lovely examples of how corporate profit making overtake their mission statement (http://www.bendigowe...-the-real-issue). This same RSPCA manager regularly kills adoptable pets with minor issues because "I want quality, not quantity, in my shelter".

My major issue with the RSPCA and the reason why I refuse to support it, is the complete lack of accountability - no-one has oversight of the RSPCA's actions and decisions, except through the courts. There is no process for appeal or review.

And I think their willingness to take money from the pork industry, the poultry industry and in NSW the PIAA is a terrible example of conflict of interest. To be making money out of groups you might need to investigates casts doubt over all of the RSPCA's actions, in my opinion.

This.

[Aphra]

Michael Linke's Pit Dahlia has her own Twitter account. :laugh: @DahliaLinke

Everyone can make up their own mind & also consider there are state differences.

Quite right. Canberra's RSPCA has a good reputation. And I saw the CEO at the 'Ban Live Export' march on Sunday, walking his pretty pit bull girl.

Now that cheers my heart.

[mita]

My major issue with the RSPCA and the reason why I refuse to support it, is the complete lack of accountability - no-one has oversight of the RSPCA's actions and decisions, except through the courts. There is no process for appeal or review.

Legislation is a State matter. As a Victorian, are you referring to your state?

Processes of appeal & review are written into Qld's Animal Care & Protection Act 2001. Which means they're part of the law.

People can access an internal review with the executive body (relevant Minister & Dpt) that oversees the Act.

If that is insufficient, they can access external appeal to the Qld Civil & Administrative Tribunal (QCAT)..

Both are 'below' the level of courts.

All of which means it's important to refer to a particular state's RSPCA & whatever legislation & appeals processes are available.

In addition to those legislation- supported review processes in Qld, there's also another little known state law that permits appeal by citizens against decisions/moves by all sorts of state/local government.... & even partly state-funded... bodies. Called Judicial Review Act. I once showed it to parents of a disabled child who disagreed (with good reason) with a departmental decision on school location. They cited it.... & decision was changed.

http://www.premiers.qld.gov.au/publications/categories/policies-and-codes/handbooks/welcome-aboard/member-duties/judicial-review.aspx

Edited May 28, 2013 by mita

[Dame Aussie]

Everyone can make up their own mind & also consider there are state differences.

Quite right. Canberra's RSPCA has a good reputation. And I saw the CEO at the 'Ban Live Export' march on Sunday, walking his pretty pit bull girl.

That's awesome

[mita]

Michael Linke's Pit Dahlia has her own Twitter account. :laugh: @DahliaLinke

Aw.... that's so cute. And I love the name Dahlia for a pretty pitbull. :)

One in the eye for the still ignorant who believe pitbull equals invariable killing machine.

[~Anne~]

All of the state and territory RSPCAs operate differently, in fact each individual RSPCA within states and territories can be quite different. Victoria, for example, has much better save rates than NSW overall, but there are some lovely examples of how corporate profit making overtake their mission statement (http://www.bendigoweekly.com/news/ducking-the-real-issue). This same RSPCA manager regularly kills adoptable pets with minor issues because "I want quality, not quantity, in my shelter".

My major issue with the RSPCA and the reason why I refuse to support it, is the complete lack of accountability - no-one has oversight of the RSPCA's actions and decisions, except through the courts. There is no process for appeal or review.

And I think their willingness to take money from the pork industry, the poultry industry and in NSW the PIAA is a terrible example of conflict of interest. To be making money out of groups you might need to investigates casts doubt over all of the RSPCA's actions, in my opinion.

Yes, this is also an issue for me.

[mita]

My major issue with the RSPCA and the reason why I refuse to support it, is the complete lack of accountability - no-one has oversight of the RSPCA's actions and decisions, except through the courts. There is no process for appeal or review.

Yes, this is also an issue for me.

Are you referring to whatever is available under NSW legislation?

I've pointed out that there are appeal/review courses of action written into the law in Q'ld. So RSPCA Qld operates in a context where there are processes for appeal and review. Below the level of courts.

[Aphra]

In Victoria, NSW, I believe SA and Tasmania, there is no review or appeals process in the legislation.

Basically the RSPCA can do what it wants, and the only recourse people have is through the courts.

[mita]

In Victoria, NSW, I believe SA and Tasmania, there is no review or appeals process in the legislation.

Basically the RSPCA can do what it wants, and the only recourse people have is through the courts.

Well, it'd not only be animal welfare decisions that citizens might want to have reviewed ... so it seems odd that those states don't have any processes for internal and especially external review of decisions made by any governmental body... or one partly funded by government (like a state's RSPCA).

[Aphra]

The RSPCA is a major voice on Victoria's Animal Welfare Committee which advises on new legislation - I suspect a review of the RSPCA's role and mandate might meet considerable resistance.

I believe that the inspectorate function should be a part of government and outsourced, but that is unlikely to happen, although I think there has been some conversation in WA about the possibility.

In Victoria, NSW, I believe SA and Tasmania, there is no review or appeals process in the legislation.

Basically the RSPCA can do what it wants, and the only recourse people have is through the courts.

Well, it'd not only be animal welfare decisions that citizens might want to have reviewed ... so it seems odd that those states don't have any processes for internal and especially external review of decisions made by any governmental body... or one partly funded by government (like a state's RSPCA).

[mita]

I believe that the inspectorate function should be a part of government and outsourced, but that is unlikely to happen, although I think there has been some conversation in WA about the possibility.

I've always said that animal cruelty enforcement should be completely done by officers employed directly in the government dpt that has to oversee the laws. In other words, a a fully funded public service... like the police... not a charity.

The CEO RSPCA Qld said publicly that his personal view was that the law enforcement function should be separated out from their animal welfare work.

But not likely to happen here.... or many other places in the current economic climate.

Edited May 29, 2013 by mita