Heather Healy Sues Rspca

[Steve]

My link

Dog breeding kennel owner sues RSPA over Longwood raid

THE owner of a pedigree breeding kennel is suing the RSPCA after it effectively shut down the business in one of Victoria's largest animal cruelty raids earlier this year.

Heather Healey, who runs Kethran Kennels in Longwood, has lodged a writ in the County Court alleging there was no reason to raid her property, in which 52 of her pedigree Chihuahua and Tibetan spaniel show dogs and puppies were seized and about 30 dogs were left behind.

Ms Healey also claims the raid was illegal because the warrant had not been properly authorised, did not disclose sufficient grounds for the raid and did not fully identify those who took part in the raid.

"They've taken all my (registration) papers so I can't even sell a dog," Ms Healey told the Herald Sun yesterday.

"Nine out of 10 dogs I give away to people to show.

"I've had over 200 Australian champions."

After the raid on Kethran Kennels and a neighbourinbreeder's premises in June, the RSPCA issued an urgent call for towels and blankets for the almost 120 dogs and six puppies rescued.

The RSPCA said the dogs had been stuck in small cages and in rancid conditions until their rescue, with authorities investigating puppy farmlinks to the show dog industry.

The RSPCA said multiple tip-offs led to its Special Investigations Unit and police and council officers raiding two properties simultaneously as part of ongoing investigations into show dog enthusiasts whowere also breeders.

Animal Liberation Victoria is among those who say they tipped off the RSPCA after ­covertly filming dogs in overcrowded cages at one of the properties in 2010.

But Ms Healey's statement of claim says her dogs were not"abandoned, diseased, distressed or disabled", and were kept according to the industry's code of practice.

"The dogs were under the care and surveillance of­ veterinarians."

Her statement says there have been no adverse reports from prior inspections and no prior breaches of the Prevention to Cruelty to Animals Act.

She is seeking the return of her dogs, damages, costs and adeclaration that the warrant was invalid and seizures unlawful. Ms Healey also wants a restraining order preventing the RSPCA from destroying or disposing of any of her dogs.

Victorian RSPCA CEO Dr Liz Walker said legal advice wasbeing sought in relation to the writ.

Edited November 12, 2016 by Steve

[Steve]

Latest update .The RSPCA is fighting it. Hope Heather has lots of money because the other guys have got ours.

[asal]

Latest update .The RSPCA is fighting it. Hope Heather has lots of money because the other guys have got ours.

Didn't it cost the owners of the murry grey stud cattle shot, over half a million? They did win but I don't think the losers have coughed up the damages awarded yet

[melzawelza]

Does she have numerous staff working daily? If not, those 82 dogs were not being cared for.

[Little Gifts]

These two statements disturb me:

"....about 30 dogs were left behind."

"Her statement says there have been no adverse reports from prior inspections and no prior breaches of the Prevention to Cruelty to Animals Act."

There is something wrong with our legislation when 52 animals are seized but 30 are left. If you are capable of neglecting 52 then you are capable of neglecting the other 30 under the duress of a seizure and hiding it from authorities better. Not that I want these poor animals ending up in the hands of the RSPCA but this concept of leaving the less neglected behind just makes no sense.

And the second statement - well just because you haven't gotten caught before doesn't mean you haven't done anything wrong. I am with Melzawelza - if you don't have an appropriate staff to animal ratio then it is simply not possible to adequately care for that many animals on your own, with your partner or with part time helpers. Even if you only give each animal 1/2 an hour of interaction and care per day that is 41 hours bare minimum per day needed for all the companion animals on that property. Simple reality.

[Two Best Dogs!]

My sympathies are still completely lacking for this person, as I've not seen any evidence that she was somehow managing all these dogs in a suitably healthy and responsible manner. How do you adequately judge the health and temperament of that many dogs without a full staff? How are they appropriately socialised and exercised?

Wasn't she the one "suspended" from dogs vic for 5 years after videos of dogs contained in tiny shit covered cages was leaked? Heather may request that people do not judge her on her past, but I am not so convinced. It takes a lot to get the RSPCA to actually act on tip off, that there were supposedly multiple from various sources?

So this article mentions the 52 seized, but doesn't mention the ones surrendered (?due to ill health??)? So that means her neighbour's 30 dogs that were taken, 17 were seized and 13 surrendered...implying Heather surrendered 37 dogs in additions to the 52 seized? Only 30 dogs in okay enough health and living situation to be left with her? That's 119 dogs on her property alone! and the 4 dead ones, that the partner/neighbour was somehow was not aware were dead on her property. How do you lose track of 4 dead dogs?! then claim the rest are healthy?

I hope this whole situation is in court faster so can see the numbers and reports...and action is taken. I would very much like to read the writ she has lodged if the article links to it?

This whole situation is reducing my trust in dogs vic, which was small to begin with I'm irked that you can only find out her background through news websites and some animal rights websites. I'm frustrated that dogs vic is not transparent about breeders and issues, that their statements are vague and shallow. How come dogs vic does not list members that have been suspended previously due to things like this? How do you identify breeder's with 'strikes' against them, so to speak? Or will they quietly remove from lists, if that, then reinstate again in 5 years? How many "heather healeys" are there who have previously done such actions and been allowed to continue? I would be furious if I bought a puppy then found out it had come from someone who had previously been involved in subpar care like in 2010, let alone again in 2016.

Not that I would get a puppy from someone keeping over hundred dogs without a suitable ratio of people to the dogs.

Few photos were released to public. Even if, at their worse, all 100+ were "only" matted like this one from her kennels the raid:

That is completely inappropriate, especially for a dogs vic show "representative". Look at those feet! That takes a lot of time and much to get to that extent, how do you not notice that?!

(And Millie, who's already been adopted since and was taken from Heather the raid in a "severely malnourished state". That's one dog too many)

Consider me incredibly sceptical as to her appropriate level of care for this many dogs.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Thistle the dog

[Lhok]

Well this is a timely news piece when dogs Vic people are trying to fight the upcoming law change.

--Lhok

[The Spotted Devil]

There are cracks in the DV system no doubt - and they are being remedied from what I hear. However DV have no power to enter a property and it's difficult to ban someone for life until they've been prosecuted. This person had more than 10 fertile bitches and therefore would have had to have a DAB from council already. Therefore she would fall under the commercial CoP - the council and RSPCA have the power here.

And no way on earth am I defending these circumstances, conditions or outcomes just to be clear. My point is that there is a legal process.

Edited November 13, 2016 by The Spotted Devil

[Steve]

There are cracks in the DV system no doubt - and they are being remedied from what I hear. However DV have no power to enter a property and it's difficult to ban someone for life until they've been prosecuted. This person had more than 10 fertile bitches and therefore would have had to have a DAB from council already. Therefore she would fall under the commercial CoP - the council and RSPCA have the power here.

And no way on earth am I defending these circumstances, conditions or outcomes just to be clear. My point is that there is a legal process.

Yep me too and that photo wasn't of her dog .

[Two Best Dogs!]

Well this is a timely news piece when dogs Vic people are trying to fight the upcoming law change.

--Lhok

To be fair, this news piece (and the only news piece on it??) seems to be from september. I'm not sure the time frame it goes from writ to full legal process and court judgements?

Although she's pretty high profile, so hopefully an article somewhere would let us know when hearings are happening and verdicts made.

[Two Best Dogs!]

There are cracks in the DV system no doubt - and they are being remedied from what I hear. However DV have no power to enter a property and it's difficult to ban someone for life until they've been prosecuted. This person had more than 10 fertile bitches and therefore would have had to have a DAB from council already. Therefore she would fall under the commercial CoP - the council and RSPCA have the power here.

And no way on earth am I defending these circumstances, conditions or outcomes just to be clear. My point is that there is a legal process.

So there is no way to find out if a dogs vic breeder has "strikes against them" and fall short of dogs vic standards? Short of asking around and hoping people are honest about other breeders (AND that what you hear isn't malicious gossip).

That troubles me. It reminds me of those threads where people come in with the sick puppy from a poor-practice but registered breeder...but the kennel name is never mentioned, no way to steer clear of them for future puppy buying people.

There are cracks in the DV system no doubt - and they are being remedied from what I hear. However DV have no power to enter a property and it's difficult to ban someone for life until they've been prosecuted. This person had more than 10 fertile bitches and therefore would have had to have a DAB from council already. Therefore she would fall under the commercial CoP - the council and RSPCA have the power here.

And no way on earth am I defending these circumstances, conditions or outcomes just to be clear. My point is that there is a legal process.

Yep me too and that photo wasn't of her dog .

Is it the neighbours dog? All I could find is it was from one of the two properties.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Thistle the dog

[*kirty*]

DogsVic are their own organisation and can make their own rules. I don't understand when people say they have no power. They should say 'we are here to inspect your property - if you refuse, you will be banned/suspended from the group'. Simple! They make the rules and they need to bloody well enforce them. I know of a few puppy farmers that are also DogsVic members - why are they still members?? They might noy have police powers but they can ban people if the want to.

[Steve]

Policing their members for the DAB has never been a requirement of VD to be given AO status because its only their members who have under ten that have had the exemptions. The exemptions mean that they only had to comply with the code of ethics for VD not for the code for breeding establishments. If having the exemption meant they were or will be responsible for policing the code for rearing and breeding establishments they have rocks in their head if they go that way and will be set up in a heart beat.

OL and the RSPCA were cheering when they got the opportunity to put the sensational stories out and used it to demonstrate that VD members shouldn't have the exemptions. Did the government or OL or the SPCA know that it was not VD responsibility to police this person or are they all just plain ignorant ? Are they being forthright now in saying it was the RSPCA and council who was responsible for policing this person or do they let the world think that VD have fallen down in what they were supposed to do and use it as an example to remove their exemptions? Everything about this is straight out of OL

[asal]

My sympathies are still completely lacking for this person, as I've not seen any evidence that she was somehow managing all these dogs in a suitably healthy and responsible manner. How do you adequately judge the health and temperament of that many dogs without a full staff? How are they appropriately socialised and exercised?

Wasn't she the one "suspended" from dogs vic for 5 years after videos of dogs contained in tiny shit covered cages was leaked? Heather may request that people do not judge her on her past, but I am not so convinced. It takes a lot to get the RSPCA to actually act on tip off, that there were supposedly multiple from various sources?

So this article mentions the 52 seized, but doesn't mention the ones surrendered (?due to ill health??)? So that means her neighbour's 30 dogs that were taken, 17 were seized and 13 surrendered...implying Heather surrendered 37 dogs in additions to the 52 seized? Only 30 dogs in okay enough health and living situation to be left with her? That's 119 dogs on her property alone! and the 4 dead ones, that the partner/neighbour was somehow was not aware were dead on her property. How do you lose track of 4 dead dogs?! then claim the rest are healthy?

I hope this whole situation is in court faster so can see the numbers and reports...and action is taken. I would very much like to read the writ she has lodged if the article links to it?

This whole situation is reducing my trust in dogs vic, which was small to begin with I'm irked that you can only find out her background through news websites and some animal rights websites. I'm frustrated that dogs vic is not transparent about breeders and issues, that their statements are vague and shallow. How come dogs vic does not list members that have been suspended previously due to things like this? How do you identify breeder's with 'strikes' against them, so to speak? Or will they quietly remove from lists, if that, then reinstate again in 5 years? How many "heather healeys" are there who have previously done such actions and been allowed to continue? I would be furious if I bought a puppy then found out it had come from someone who had previously been involved in subpar care like in 2010, let alone again in 2016.

Not that I would get a puppy from someone keeping over hundred dogs without a suitable ratio of people to the dogs.

Few photos were released to public. Even if, at their worse, all 100+ were "only" matted like this one from her kennels:

That is completely inappropriate, especially for a dogs vic show "representative". Look at those feet! That takes a lot of time and much to get to that extent, how do you not notice that?!

(And Millie, who's already been adopted since and was taken from Heather in a "severely malnourished state". That's one dog too many)

Consider me incredibly sceptical as to her appropriate level of care for this many dogs.

as pointed out above that kennel bred Chihuahua's and Tibetan Spaniels, THAT is not either breed? so was a generic suitably horror photo used instead?

neither chi's or Tibbie could manage a suitably matted coat as said in this link "Small but active and alert, the Tibetan Spaniel dog breed hails from mountainous Tibet, where he served as a companion and watchdog. He’s known for his intelligence, easy-care coat, and his desire to keep watch over his family from high perches in the house.

Read more at http://dogtime.com/dog-breeds/tibetan-spaniel#EXZ2FqVsK8VRWgAZ.99 "

Bit of an oops there surely? Are the descriptions of the dogs as accurate as the photo? If that photo is all you have made your assumptions from

Edited November 13, 2016 by asal

[Two Best Dogs!]

Policing their members for the DAB has never been a requirement of VD to be given AO status because its only their members who have under ten that have had the exemptions. The exemptions mean that they only had to comply with the code of ethics for VD not for the code for breeding establishments. If having the exemption meant they were or will be responsible for policing the code for rearing and breeding establishments they have rocks in their head if they go that way and will be set up in a heart beat.

OL and the RSPCA were cheering when they got the opportunity to put the sensational stories out and used it to demonstrate that VD members shouldn't have the exemptions. Did the government or OL or the SPCA know that it was not VD responsibility to police this person or are they all just plain ignorant ? Are they being forthright now in saying it was the RSPCA and council who was responsible for policing this person or do they let the world think that VD have fallen down in what they were supposed to do and use it as an example to remove their exemptions? Everything about this is straight out of OL

I am not sure what AO is standing for?

It's not that I expect DogsVic to police their members strictly, that I am baffled and frustrated that those they have previously suspended or had disciplinary action against are not listed or indicated as such and that they let her keep her status within dogsvic. Why did they remove the suspension from 2010? Let alone let her become chair of a breed club (then back down to whatever it she was at the time of the raid. i think someone discovered it was secretary or something?). If not meeting what dogs vic supposedly stands for ("Promoting excellence in dog behaviour, health, companionship, work, community acceptance and responsible dog ownership. Maintaining pure breed standards and education") I would think and hope they would remove those who are working counter to that?

When people are hunting for a registered purebreed to buy, they are directed to dolz online and dogsvic. But if people like Heather are included in the list without any indication of the strikes against them...that is trust damaging because I don't understand how one is meant to avoid the registered irresponsible breeders or registered puppy mill?

I think I better go have a cup of tea before I frustrate myself into circles, am not meaning to sidetrack from the discussion of Heather's puppy mill - just that everytime she comes up I am reminded of how difficult it is to ensure a puppy is responsibly bred even through the representive body.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Thistle the dog

[The Spotted Devil]

She wasn't president of the breed club at all. This is part of the problem. Media.

Yep it IS hard. But a lot of people don't want to be educated. And if ANKC breeders only provide 17% of the puppies what the hell are we supposed to do?

Edited November 13, 2016 by The Spotted Devil

[mita]

[quote name='asal' timestamp='1479008435' post='6856917'

neither chi's or Tibbie could manage a suitably matted coat as said in this link "Small but active and alert, the Tibetan Spaniel dog breed hails from mountainous Tibet, where he served as a companion and watchdog. He’s known for his intelligence, easy-care coat, and his desire to keep watch over his family from high perches in the house.

Read more at http://dogtime.com/dog-breeds/tibetan-spaniel#EXZ2FqVsK8VRWgAZ.99 "

Hello.... from a long-time owner of Tibetan Spaniels. That description says...'easy-care coat...meaning it's easy to care for, if you care for it. The statement presumes the coat is to be cared for.

My tibbies would be in a hell of a mess if they didn't get regular monitoring & care of their coats. Read 'matted'. Neglected tibbies very quickly get mats forming & I've seen other rescued tibbies with lumps of matted fur which felt & looked like rocks under their ears.

Thistle the dog, I thoroughly appreciate what you've posted. On behalf of tibbies, thank you.

Edited November 13, 2016 by mita

[Steve]

Policing their members for the DAB has never been a requirement of VD to be given AO status because its only their members who have under ten that have had the exemptions. The exemptions mean that they only had to comply with the code of ethics for VD not for the code for breeding establishments. If having the exemption meant they were or will be responsible for policing the code for rearing and breeding establishments they have rocks in their head if they go that way and will be set up in a heart beat.

OL and the RSPCA were cheering when they got the opportunity to put the sensational stories out and used it to demonstrate that VD members shouldn't have the exemptions. Did the government or OL or the SPCA know that it was not VD responsibility to police this person or are they all just plain ignorant ? Are they being forthright now in saying it was the RSPCA and council who was responsible for policing this person or do they let the world think that VD have fallen down in what they were supposed to do and use it as an example to remove their exemptions? Everything about this is straight out of OL

I am not sure what AO is standing for?

It's not that I expect DogsVic to police their members strictly, that I am baffled and frustrated that those they have previously suspended or had disciplinary action against are not listed or indicated as such and that they let her keep her status within dogsvic. Why did they remove the suspension from 2010? Let alone let her become chair of a breed club (then back down to whatever it she was at the time of the raid). If not meeting what dogs vic supposedly stands for ("Promoting excellence in dog behaviour, health, companionship, work, community acceptance and responsible dog ownership. Maintaining pure breed standards and education") I would think and hope they would remove those who are working counter to that?

When people are hunting for a registered purebreed to buy, they are directed to dolz online and dogsvic. But if people like Heather are included in the list without any indication of the strikes against them...that is trust damaging because I don't understand how one is meant to avoid the registered irresponsible breeders or registered puppy mill?

The suspension from 2010 was due to a paperwork issue not that she was guilty of anything .Just because Animal lib say they had photos and they dobbed her in for whatever back then doesn't mean she was charged or found guilty of anything that would remove her from VD .She was the secretary of the breed club before the crap in 2010. The photos of the chis in small pens were taken in 2010 while she was cleaning the other pens -made to look like she kept them like that . Blind freddy could see she didn't because they would have been out of them in ten minutes and they were clean.

AO is Applicable Organisation which is how they got the exemptions for their members. It means that everyone who is not a member must have a DAB if they have 3 fertile dogs but Vicdogs dont need one unless they have 10. That's one of the things they are trying to change. How do you know she wasn't doing everything "Promoting excellence in dog behaviour, health, companionship, work, community acceptance and responsible dog ownership. Maintaining pure breed standards and education" She bred over 200 champions and sold a hell of a lot of pet puppies so where are all the people who are complaining about them not cutting the grade as far as temperament, health, companionship is concerned? She sure as hell has proven she was looking after the standard. I don't know if she is guilty of something she should be punished for or not but she is entitled to be treated fairly and have a right to defend herself. I'm not defending her, I don't know her but I don't believe everything we are hearing either.

Re registered breeders - bit silly isn't it to expect that just because someone is registered and breed purebreds that they will do it all the way the public has been told is the only way to do it but that's what has been fed out .

[asal]

[quote name='asal' timestamp='1479008435' post='6856917'

neither chi's or Tibbie could manage a suitably matted coat as said in this link "Small but active and alert, the Tibetan Spaniel dog breed hails from mountainous Tibet, where he served as a companion and watchdog. He’s known for his intelligence, easy-care coat, and his desire to keep watch over his family from high perches in the house.

Read more at http://dogtime.com/dog-breeds/tibetan-spaniel#EXZ2FqVsK8VRWgAZ.99 "

Hello.... from a long-time owner of Tibetan Spaniels. That description says...'easy-care coat...meaning it's easy to care for, if you care for it. The statement presumes the coat is to be cared for.

My tibbies would be in a hell of a mess if they didn't get regular monitoring & care of their coats. Read 'matted'. Neglected tibbies very quickly get mats forming & I've seen other rescued tibbies with lumps of matted fur which felt & looked like rocks under their ears.

Thistle the dog, I thoroughly appreciate what you've posted. On behalf of tibbies, thank you.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=tibetan+spaniel+photos&client=firefox-b&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjT6YTd96TQAhUCVbwKHRi6C5MQsAQIGw&biw=1920&bih=971

so? Tibetan's don't have short hair on their ears like the breed photos? and that maltese looking thing is actually a Tibetan Spaniel is it?

I dont know the woman either, but over the years have learned to be a little skeptical of the press releases accuracy. The owners of the murry greys they shot were similarly pillioried and they have been awarded some 2 million in damages I think the last press release said.

http://www.standard.net.au/story/2475869/rspca-faces-huge-bill-over-framlingham-cattle-cull/

who is going to forget the case of the seized Tibetan Spaniels for the crime of having been shown after being debarked in NSW instead of Victoria under a new law brought in saw their owner facing 80 charges and I think 80 years in jail if awarded the maximum sentence.

As I recall the sorry take began when she rehomed one of her champions and its new owner decided get it vet checked, the vet not only called the rspca, but as the dog did not like her, convinced the new owners who had I understand no problems with its temperament to put it down. Yet the standard for the breed states "Characteristics:Gay and assertive, highly intelligent, aloof with strangers." which was exactly what the vet was, a stranger, to have become an Australian champion it had to have passed a temperament test every time it was examined or banned from the ring .

despite huge public outrage the rspca wrung their hands and pleaded their hands were tied, she had broken the law. strangely the magistrate dismissed the case, unfortunately not before she had been named and shamed on every public newspaper and tv channel in the country.

So, no, I don't assume all that they tell you is true anymore

Edited November 13, 2016 by asal

[RuralPug]

[quote name='asal' timestamp='1479008435' post='6856917'

neither chi's or Tibbie could manage a suitably matted coat as said in this link "Small but active and alert, the Tibetan Spaniel dog breed hails from mountainous Tibet, where he served as a companion and watchdog. He's known for his intelligence, easy-care coat, and his desire to keep watch over his family from high perches in the house.

Read more at http://dogtime.com/d...FqVsK8VRWgAZ.99 "

{/quote]

Hello.... from a long-time owner of Tibetan Spaniels. That description says...'easy-care coat...meaning it's easy to care for, if you care for it. The statement presumes the coat is to be cared for.

My tibbies would be in a hell of a mess if they didn't get regular monitoring & care of their coats. Read 'matted'. Neglected tibbies very quickly get mats forming & I've seen other rescued tibbies with lumps of matted fur which felt & looked like rocks under their ears.

Thistle the dog, I thoroughly appreciate what you've posted. On behalf of tibbies, thank you.

https://www.google.c...iw=1920&bih=971

so? Tibetan's don't have short hair on their ears like the breed photos? and that maltese looking thing is actually a Tibetan Spaniel is it?

asal it appears that you have misunderstood. mita was not questioning your statement that the dog pictured was neither a Tibetan Spaniel or a Chihuahua.

She was quite clearly pointing out that Tibbies could indeed become matted if not cared for, despite the quote about easy care coat that you posted. I think it is important that fallacies or misleading information about our favorite breeds is corrected, don't you?

Edited to say I've stuffed up the quotes, sorry but I think most people will sort it out....

Edited November 13, 2016 by RuralPug