Little Gifts Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 So is court ordered treatment for the hoarding a more suitable sentence? Perhaps court ordered animal care courses too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_PL_ Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 So is court ordered treatment for the hoarding a more suitable sentence? Perhaps court ordered animal care courses too. That's the million dollar question. Recidivism rates are quite high I just can't find the exact % right now. I did a bit of reading up on the subject, mainly due to rescue and the easy availability of animals.The new problem of pets being sent to anyone, anywhere just to save them isn't helping and is actively enabling very unwell people. I wanted to know the difference and evolution of a hoarder. And seeing so many rescuers called hoarders when people don't like them. There's lots of people with "too many dogs". Not all of them are ill. Ironically puppy farmers are quick to plead hoarding if they get caught. Anyway ... rambling on. lol :laugh: :laugh: Could be completely wrong. http://vet.tufts.edu/hoarding/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Gifts Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 (edited) When I first moved to this area back in 1988 there was a lady who was always in the local paper about being victimised by the local council and always in desperate need of public assistance. She saved every single dog she could and she had them all living together in one big fenced yard. Hundreds of them. She was always being evicted from a property and in desperate need of a new one for having too many dogs because she refused to play by any real rules. The local shopping centres had food donation bins and they were always full. I don't know how else she covered the costs. I never knew of anyone who adopted from her, there were never any volunteers pictured or mentioned in the news stories and I knew the biggest vet in this town (who also donated a lot of services) and she wasn't a client of theirs. The stories were always about her saving the dogs, not rehabilitating and rehoming them. From the photos it looked sanitary but barren and now I realise that it was not a good place for a dog to be and she was probably a hoarder using the guise of being a persecuted rescuer. I think her first name was Margot. She dropped off the radar quite a while back and I always wondered what happened to all those dogs. I can't believe puppy farmers try and use the same excuse. The main difference is that most hoarders don't recognise themselves as hoarders and selling the animals and making a profit from them seems to not even be on their list of priorities. Having them and having lots of them to fill an emotional void seems to be the key. So it still comes back to that problem of authorities knowing this is happening and not removing any animals at risk as soon as possible. Yes they might get more but isn't there a responsibility to the ones already known to be at risk of harm? Removing and continuing to remove may be the best outcome that can be gained legally and otherwise. Edited April 24, 2015 by Little Gifts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbedWire Posted April 24, 2015 Author Share Posted April 24, 2015 Powerlegs I find your links to animal hoarding very interesting. It is also interesting that you apply them to this case in the ACT. It is all food for thought. Thank you for those links. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stressmagnet Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Powerlegs, my first thought was 'hoarding' as well. Not all the people charged, of course - but I strongly suspect one or two have hoarding issues. Thanks for the read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbedWire Posted April 24, 2015 Author Share Posted April 24, 2015 I have been thinking further and LG I remember, when I was younger, people who had lots of animals (like 20 or more) and how other people thought of them as crazy animal lovers and they made donations of food or money and even left unwanted animals on their doorsteps. I think those 'crazy animal lovers' were all women who lived alone. I do wonder about this case in the ACT. Was he a hoarder? Or just a cruel callous guy who should be condemned? Just wondering some more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lillypilly Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 When I first moved to this area back in 1988 there was a lady who was always in the local paper about being victimised by the local council and always in desperate need of public assistance. She saved every single dog she could and she had them all living together in one big fenced yard. Hundreds of them. She was always being evicted from a property and in desperate need of a new one for having too many dogs because she refused to play by any real rules. The local shopping centres had food donation bins and they were always full. I don't know how else she covered the costs. I never knew of anyone who adopted from her, there were never any volunteers pictured or mentioned in the news stories and I knew the biggest vet in this town (who also donated a lot of services) and she wasn't a client of theirs. The stories were always about her saving the dogs, not rehabilitating and rehoming them. From the photos it looked sanitary but barren and now I realise that it was not a good place for a dog to be and she was probably a hoarder using the guise of being a persecuted rescuer. I think her first name was Margot. She dropped off the radar quite a while back and I always wondered what happened to all those dogs. LG are you referring to Margot Bernard from Margo's Animal Sanctuary? This lady was living in the Logan Council area and had an interim licence for her many critters. She had a barnyard full of assorted animals. In 2014 Margo was finally pushed by council to downsize and last I heard she had 5 dogs. Around the end of 2014 Margo and her barnyard seems to have disappeared. xx LP xx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mita Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 There was a Brisbane family, few years back, who fitted into the animal hoarding pattern, many dogs and extremely poor care & management. As with that pattern, they were oblivious to 'education' efforts & kept on doing the same, despite a number of charges for neglect. Finally, an option of banning people from owning animals for life was written into the law ... & that was applied to them. But, typical of the Battery Bunny behaviour of animal hoarders, they were later busted again. This time, they'd hidden piles of neglected dogs and cats up in the ceiling of their house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_PL_ Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 Sorry, I've been offline. I'm glad to see my off topic hoarder ramble might have little relevance with cruelty and neglect cases like this. It's interesting to hear the examples because I think we've all looked back on someone eg the local crazy lady who had a zillion animals. The place where everyone in the community knew if there was an unwanted pet or a litter of kittens they could always be thrown over the fence or left on the doorstep. She really loves animals and won't say no....... To see in hindsight, that it wasn't normal or caring but very very sick. The collectors in rescue (or those sourcing from rescue/pounds) scour hundreds of different pages on FB and use a few aliases to get what they want. Unfortunately it's not yet in the DSM and even plans to undo the complex damage and prevent repeated hoarding are still a work in progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Gifts Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 (edited) When I first moved to this area back in 1988 there was a lady who was always in the local paper about being victimised by the local council and always in desperate need of public assistance. She saved every single dog she could and she had them all living together in one big fenced yard. Hundreds of them. She was always being evicted from a property and in desperate need of a new one for having too many dogs because she refused to play by any real rules. The local shopping centres had food donation bins and they were always full. I don't know how else she covered the costs. I never knew of anyone who adopted from her, there were never any volunteers pictured or mentioned in the news stories and I knew the biggest vet in this town (who also donated a lot of services) and she wasn't a client of theirs. The stories were always about her saving the dogs, not rehabilitating and rehoming them. From the photos it looked sanitary but barren and now I realise that it was not a good place for a dog to be and she was probably a hoarder using the guise of being a persecuted rescuer. I think her first name was Margot. She dropped off the radar quite a while back and I always wondered what happened to all those dogs. LG are you referring to Margot Bernard from Margo's Animal Sanctuary? This lady was living in the Logan Council area and had an interim licence for her many critters. She had a barnyard full of assorted animals. In 2014 Margo was finally pushed by council to downsize and last I heard she had 5 dogs. Around the end of 2014 Margo and her barnyard seems to have disappeared. xx LP xx Yes LP, that would be her. I confess I haven't read our local community paper for quite a while (it has other purposes!) so can't believe she was still going in 2014 and still being chased by council! And given her ongoing rescue status I still don't know a soul who has adopted an animal from her or worked with her in a rescue capacity in that whole time which just seems weird to me. Do you know her or know of her? What do you think about her rescue efforts? Legit or hoarder? She still has a website (did a google) but links to adoptions and pet rescue don't work and some of the other links are just plain odd - you can still donate and play her music though! I found this newspaper article from late last year and it astounds me that it is the same old story - another 11th hour eviction and all these animals need somewhere to go! Perhaps that is the only way she does rehome any? And perhaps she hasn't found anywhere new to start up again? I can't imagine she leaves the properties in pristine condition. http://www.couriermail.com.au/questnews/logan/eight-rescue-dogs-still-up-for-adoption-from-margos-animal-santurary-in-park-ridge/story-fni9r0nh-1227015403687 And Mita, I cannot even bear the thought of companion animals living in ceilings. So horribly wrong. Edited April 26, 2015 by Little Gifts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 So is court ordered treatment for the hoarding a more suitable sentence? Perhaps court ordered animal care courses too. That's the million dollar question. Recidivism rates are quite high I just can't find the exact % right now. I did a bit of reading up on the subject, mainly due to rescue and the easy availability of animals.The new problem of pets being sent to anyone, anywhere just to save them isn't helping and is actively enabling very unwell people. I wanted to know the difference and evolution of a hoarder. And seeing so many rescuers called hoarders when people don't like them. There's lots of people with "too many dogs". Not all of them are ill. Ironically puppy farmers are quick to plead hoarding if they get caught. Anyway ... rambling on. lol :laugh: :laugh: Could be completely wrong. http://vet.tufts.edu/hoarding/ From what I recall, recidivism rates for animal hoarding were pretty much 100%, even in cases where courts had imposed bans on ownership. As for hoarders not selling animals.. breeding animals for the purpose of "sale" is one fairly common justification for hoarders keeping/breeding animals. Some animals do get sold but the motivation to breed them in the first place was never actually money. Kind of like rescue hoarders (I can think of one very high profile example of rescue hoarding going on right now >.> ) in that there appears to be legitimate reason for obtaining animals beyond what can be cared for but when you look further into the situation, it's the same old patterns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Update : DPP are seeking a custodial sentence for this matter. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-08/canberra-man-animal-neglect-sentencing-hearing/7149986?WT.ac=statenews_act Man guilty of 99 animal neglect charges kept dogs emaciated and fly-bitten, court hears A man who pleaded guilty to nearly 100 charges of animal neglect kept dogs emaciated and fly-bitten, RSPCA vets have told the ACT Magistrates Court. Stefan Trpcevski last week pleaded guilty to 99 charges relating to animal neglect, and a sentencing hearing was held this afternoon. The charges included failing to seek veterinary treatment for dogs and failing to provide animals with food or water. It is understood he had 25 dogs, although the charges related to only seven animals. Vets Lillian Wong and Ashley Jordan gave evidence regarding five dogs brought to them in December 2014 while they were working with the RSPCA in Canberra. They told the court some of the dogs were severely underweight, some were fly-bitten around the ears, and one appeared to have had part of its tail amputated. The tail was still bleeding when the dog was presented to Ms Wong, who described it as a "traumatic amputation of some sort". "It would have been very painful," she said. In cross-examination, Trpcevski's lawyer questioned whether the tail injury could have been caused by a spider bite. The matter was adjourned while a pre-sentence report is prepared, and will return to court for sentencing in late March. Prosecutors have indicated they will seek a term of imprisonment. http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/dogs-found-at-canberra-house-were-underfed-and-suffered-hair-loss-fly-bites-20160208-gmokvs.html Dogs found at Canberra house were underfed and suffered hair loss, fly bites Date February 8, 2016 - 11:30PM 26 reading now Dogs that belonged to a Canberra man who admitted to nearly 100 animal mistreatment offences were underweight, underfed and suffered hair loss and fly bites that had scabbed over, a court has heard. Stefan Trpcevski, 35, has pleaded guilty to 99 charges related to animal mistreatment and neglect and is currently before the ACT Magistrates Court. Authorities previously said they found 27 dogs in varying states of neglect when they raided two properties in Macquarie and Ainslie late in 2013. Trpcevski was charged with numerous offences ranging from failing to provide animals with adequate food and water to failing to seek veterinary treatment and keeping unregistered dogs. Vets at the RSPCA shelter in Weston, who assessed several animals seized from the Ainslie home at the time, spoke of the animals' poor health during a sentencing hearing on Monday. Former RSPCA vet Ashley Jordan told the court one of the dogs, "Bindy", was underweight, suffered hair loss and had fly bites and scabs on her head. He said the dog was assessed as a three out of nine on the body condition scoring chart used to calculate body fat levels, with one being emaciated and nine being obese, and the likely reason for her low weight was that she had been underfed. Under cross-examination, Dr Jordan said while it would be possible for the dog to be bitten several times without an owner noticing, it shouldn't be difficult to prevent ongoing fly bites before they got that severe. The court heard vets assessed another male crossbreed dog as one, or emaciated, on the body condition scoring chart, as the animal's hip bones and spine were clearly visible. Prosecutor Katrina McKenzie told the court the "unnecessary pain" caused to the animals in Trpcevski's care was such that a term of imprisonment should be imposed. She said Trpcevski's offending "must be close to one of the worst cases" of its type. Trpcevski's defence lawyer told the court her client suffered from debilitating mental illness, which impaired his judgment, and he had been receiving help from ACT Mental Health. Chief Magistrate Lorraine Walker ordered a pre-sentence report be prepared before the matter returns to court for sentencing in March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronja Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 In the ACT keeping an undesexed dog over 6 months old is the law unless you have a permit, however this is not really enforced. The only time it is actually enforced in cases like this. Even dogs that enter the pound as strays which are undesexed are allowed to go back home to their owners without any fine for keeping an undesexed animal, or usually not even any mention of it. FOI request showing number of infringements for keeping undesexed dogs and cats: http://www.cmd.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/644031/Decision-Letter-Signed.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Laws like this are not designed to be enforceable. 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