HappyCamper Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 She was surrendered to Blacktown pound today. I think she is impound number 1403027. Why do people not invest time with their dogs. Our boy is the same age and a pain at the moment but we make the time to ensure he is happy. Just 15 mins a day makes such a difference. . Ill try to secure a rescue for her as soon as they get a picture up. Best i can do and try to ensure she doesnt fall into the hands of certain people can you get more info on her temp for me? like dogs, cats, kids etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fbaudry Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 Interestingly Melzawelza, when you chat to the manager, or during every batch of volunteers induction programs, they state very clearly that they are not a no kill shelter, but a low kill one. I can think of one healthy young dog PTS recently. Very active mix of breed who was going crazy in a kennel environment and would have required a very dog savvy owner willing to put in a lot of hard work in training / managing / meeting the exercise requirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogslife Posted June 10, 2014 Author Share Posted June 10, 2014 She was surrendered to Blacktown pound today. I think she is impound number 1403027. Why do people not invest time with their dogs. Our boy is the same age and a pain at the moment but we make the time to ensure he is happy. Just 15 mins a day makes such a difference. . Ill try to secure a rescue for her as soon as they get a picture up. Best i can do and try to ensure she doesnt fall into the hands of certain people can you get more info on her temp for me? like dogs, cats, kids etc She was a delight. She lived with another small dog and a 7 year old girl. The family then had another baby and the dog never got walked etc. They got rid of her because they had brush fencing and she started chewing her way out. With some exercise and basic training she will be a delight again. Thanks for looking out for her. :) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 (edited) Interestingly Melzawelza, when you chat to the manager, or during every batch of volunteers induction programs, they state very clearly that they are not a no kill shelter, but a low kill one. I can think of one healthy young dog PTS recently. Very active mix of breed who was going crazy in a kennel environment and would have required a very dog savvy owner willing to put in a lot of hard work in training / managing / meeting the exercise requirements. I'm sure that happens more often than we'd care to think. I know people that have worked there including one who left due to the euthanasia rate but hey, who am I to disagree with Melzawelza or Danny's Darling? Edited June 10, 2014 by Her Majesty Dogmad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melzawelza Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 (edited) Interestingly Melzawelza, when you chat to the manager, or during every batch of volunteers induction programs, they state very clearly that they are not a no kill shelter, but a low kill one. I can think of one healthy young dog PTS recently. Very active mix of breed who was going crazy in a kennel environment and would have required a very dog savvy owner willing to put in a lot of hard work in training / managing / meeting the exercise requirements. I'm sure that happens more often than we'd care to think. I know people that have worked there including one who left due to the euthanasia rate but hey, who am I to disagree with Melzawelza or Danny's Darling? their stats are online for all to see, it's nothing to do with me: http://sydneydogsandcatshome.org/about-us/statistics/ I'm not sure how long ago your friend worked there but their euthanasia rate was very poor prior to a few years ago when they joined the Getting to Zero initiative, which is very similar to no kill. They've really turned it around since then. fbaudry regardless of what they label themselves as they meet the definition of a 'no kill' shelter when it comes to the dogs in their care - last year they euthanased 5% of dogs, only 1% of treatable dogs in their care were euthanased. That is no kill. Whether they choose to use that label or not is up to them. It's a different story for cats, and always will be at all shelters while we can't Trap/Neuter/Release. Edited June 10, 2014 by melzawelza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fbaudry Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 I think there is confusion about what the term 'no kill' means. The correct definition as per the person who created the movement is: "A no-kill shelter is a shelter that saves all healthy, treatable and rehabilitatable animals. A rule of thumb is that, to be no-kill, a shelters saves more than 90% of all animals received.[5] Ideally, No Kill would mean all "adoptable" and "treatable" animals are saved and only "unadoptable" or "non-rehabilitatable" animals are euthanized, but 90% is the threshold." The no kill movement brings the term 'euthanasia' back to it's dictionary definition - to release an animal from suffering that can't be rectified. Typically less than 10% of the animals that come in to a shelter are truly untreatable, and as such the threshold is put at 90% (but this can of course be improved on depending of what that 10% is like and some places are saving even more than 90%). A no kill shelter euthanises animals that are behaviourally or medically untreatable, but it does not 'kill' - which is putting to sleep healthy and adoptable or medically or behaviourally treatable animals. Looking at SDCH's stats they absolutely meet the definition for 'no kill' when it comes to dogs in their care. That's interesting that they chose not to use the no-kill label then if they could. Not sure the definition you quoted is so widely accepted in the community, as it differs from the one used in many circles (including students in companion animal services), for whom only a rescue group who seriously screen their intakes can claim to be no-kill. To me, un-adoptable or non-rehabilitable leaves the door open to very subjective interpretations. The young dog I have in mind recently (and there are other cases) was perfectly fit, healthy but in need of far more training, stimulation and exercise that could be provided in a shelter environment. Being a very common cross, excitable young male just didn't appeal to any potential adopters and sealed his fate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 (edited) I think there is confusion about what the term 'no kill' means. The correct definition as per the person who created the movement is: "A no-kill shelter is a shelter that saves all healthy, treatable and rehabilitatable animals. A rule of thumb is that, to be no-kill, a shelters saves more than 90% of all animals received.[5] Ideally, No Kill would mean all "adoptable" and "treatable" animals are saved and only "unadoptable" or "non-rehabilitatable" animals are euthanized, but 90% is the threshold." The no kill movement brings the term 'euthanasia' back to it's dictionary definition - to release an animal from suffering that can't be rectified. Typically less than 10% of the animals that come in to a shelter are truly untreatable, and as such the threshold is put at 90% (but this can of course be improved on depending of what that 10% is like and some places are saving even more than 90%). A no kill shelter euthanises animals that are behaviourally or medically untreatable, but it does not 'kill' - which is putting to sleep healthy and adoptable or medically or behaviourally treatable animals. Looking at SDCH's stats they absolutely meet the definition for 'no kill' when it comes to dogs in their care. That's interesting that they chose not to use the no-kill label then if they could. Not sure the definition you quoted is so widely accepted in the community, as it differs from the one used in many circles (including students in companion animal services), for whom only a rescue group who seriously screen their intakes can claim to be no-kill. To me, un-adoptable or non-rehabilitable leaves the door open to very subjective interpretations. The young dog I have in mind recently (and there are other cases) was perfectly fit, healthy but in need of far more training, stimulation and exercise that could be provided in a shelter environment. Being a very common cross, excitable young male just didn't appeal to any potential adopters and sealed his fate. Agreed fbaudry. I've worked with the RSPCA on two occasions recently, taking on dogs that have failed their tests (and always will fail their tests) for timidity. Both purebreds. I won't bore everyone with the details but thank God the RSPCA contacted me and are now working with some rescues. Both dogs had exceptionally lovely temperaments but were not good in a shelter environment. I also spent 3 years working at the Animal Welfare League where to my great distress, many beautiful dogs (all medium/large and mainly crossbreeds) were euthanased. They did hold some for a few weeks or months and I knew they were lovely dogs because I spent hours with them every week. On occasion, the shelter manager took a dislike to a certain dog and that would sign his or her death warrant .... Whilst you'd really hope that shelters etc don't do this, sadly many do. Edited June 10, 2014 by Her Majesty Dogmad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fbaudry Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 Dogmad, your first point is so close my heart... Back in 2011, a former colleague of mine who was volunteering at the AWL came to me in tears about another little dog who was going to be PTS because he failed his temp test 3 times (small terrier, very timid). One of the supervisors had taken a shine to him and fought hard so it didn't happen. They eventually reached a compromise that he could only be released to a foster home, and after months of red tape, I was able to foster him. The rest is history as we decided to adopt him, and I have no doubt he would fail their temperament test even today. He is a sweet little dog, has never growled at or bitten us but will avoid strangers. Fine going to the parks, walking on streets etc but I'm sure he would fail having strangers corner him in a cage and hover over him. This ex colleague of mine and the above mentioned supervisor both left after years there, precisely because of the reason you mention. I chose to volunteer at SDCH because that's where I adopted my first australian dog (RIP Olaf - my avatar) and I knew I could cope with the driving distance. I try my best to make a little bit of the difference to the animals there, but I'm not saying I agree with all their policies. And to completely derail this thread, a quick pic of Will the timid, courtesy of Ruthless, just because I can :laugh: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151637665971526&set=a.10150319437651526.337734.675806525&type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-ak-frc3%2Ft1.0-9%2F1377085_10151637665971526_998716542_n.jpg&size=448%2C674 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melzawelza Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 I think there is confusion about what the term 'no kill' means. The correct definition as per the person who created the movement is: "A no-kill shelter is a shelter that saves all healthy, treatable and rehabilitatable animals. A rule of thumb is that, to be no-kill, a shelters saves more than 90% of all animals received.[5] Ideally, No Kill would mean all "adoptable" and "treatable" animals are saved and only "unadoptable" or "non-rehabilitatable" animals are euthanized, but 90% is the threshold." The no kill movement brings the term 'euthanasia' back to it's dictionary definition - to release an animal from suffering that can't be rectified. Typically less than 10% of the animals that come in to a shelter are truly untreatable, and as such the threshold is put at 90% (but this can of course be improved on depending of what that 10% is like and some places are saving even more than 90%). A no kill shelter euthanises animals that are behaviourally or medically untreatable, but it does not 'kill' - which is putting to sleep healthy and adoptable or medically or behaviourally treatable animals. Looking at SDCH's stats they absolutely meet the definition for 'no kill' when it comes to dogs in their care. That's interesting that they chose not to use the no-kill label then if they could. Not sure the definition you quoted is so widely accepted in the community, as it differs from the one used in many circles (including students in companion animal services), for whom only a rescue group who seriously screen their intakes can claim to be no-kill. To me, un-adoptable or non-rehabilitable leaves the door open to very subjective interpretations. The young dog I have in mind recently (and there are other cases) was perfectly fit, healthy but in need of far more training, stimulation and exercise that could be provided in a shelter environment. Being a very common cross, excitable young male just didn't appeal to any potential adopters and sealed his fate. There is a lot of confusion about the term in the general public and in animal welfare circles. People hear 'no kill' and assume that no animal gets the green dream - ever. This of course would be totally unrealistic and so often people frown at 'No kill' or are quick to say 'we're not no-kill, we're LOW kill' because they don't actually know that the person who created the term and also the steps that it takes to achieve no kill differentiates between the idea of 'killing' and 'euthanasia'. It's entirely possible SDCH aren't aware of what the actual definition is or choose not to use it because others might take it at face value and believe they never give anything the green dream. They also probably don't choose to use it because they aren't no kill when it comes to cats. So really they can't define themselves as a no-kill shelter. But their results for dogs only would be considered no kill. Personally, while I like the idea of the term once it's explained, it causes way too many problems. I can't think of a better alternative though. Sorry to hear about the dog that went down, it's really hard as a volley when you get to know them and they don't make it out. One thing I think SDCH could improve on is getting a better home-based foster carer network going so that dogs like that are able to be further assessed away from the shelter environment and given the opportunity to shine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogslife Posted June 10, 2014 Author Share Posted June 10, 2014 She was surrendered to Blacktown pound today. I think she is impound number 1403027. Why do people not invest time with their dogs. Our boy is the same age and a pain at the moment but we make the time to ensure he is happy. Just 15 mins a day makes such a difference. . Ill try to secure a rescue for her as soon as they get a picture up. Best i can do and try to ensure she doesnt fall into the hands of certain people can you get more info on her temp for me? like dogs, cats, kids etc She was a delight. She lived with another small dog and a 7 year old girl. The family then had another baby and the dog never got walked etc. They got rid of her because they had brush fencing and she started chewing her way out. With some exercise and basic training she will be a delight again. Thanks for looking out for her. :) . Her photo is up. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyCamper Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 She was surrendered to Blacktown pound today. I think she is impound number 1403027. Why do people not invest time with their dogs. Our boy is the same age and a pain at the moment but we make the time to ensure he is happy. Just 15 mins a day makes such a difference. . Ill try to secure a rescue for her as soon as they get a picture up. Best i can do and try to ensure she doesnt fall into the hands of certain people can you get more info on her temp for me? like dogs, cats, kids etc She was a delight. She lived with another small dog and a 7 year old girl. The family then had another baby and the dog never got walked etc. They got rid of her because they had brush fencing and she started chewing her way out. With some exercise and basic training she will be a delight again. Thanks for looking out for her. :) . Her photo is up. . Awesome thank you will see what I can do for her Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyCamper Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 She is beautiful! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 (edited) . Edited June 13, 2014 by megan_ 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