Jump to content

Rescuer found guilty


_PL_
 Share

Recommended Posts

That’s horrible, I’m so glad someone spotted this before the animals numbers got any higher. Especially in all this heat :’( 

 

Im confused by the last line about approved animals. Does this mean she will still be acting as a “rescue” or is it more privately owned animals aka pets?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Reveal hidden contents

 

  •  
  • Behind a paywall, pics incl
Edited by Powerlegs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

She is no longer allowed to be associated with that rescue, according to one of the articles above.
 

  Quote

She was also ordered to pay court and veterinary costs of over $1500 and was given a five year prohibition order for all animals other than as approved by RSPCA QLD Chief Inspector.

This means she has to remove herself from all Couch Surfer Operations.

Expand  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That makes a touch more sense - it reads like the rescue will continue operating under the other people? The pet rescue contact is different to the person who was hoarding/overwhelmed/cutting costs but that could mean anything from one person to multiple people (I notice the fb page is gone). I'm glad someone called it in before it got too bad, but I do wish articles like this would publish the reason it got so bad if known? Then maybe can raise awareness more on spotting when someone is getting overwhelmed or cutting costs or hoarding or moving into a sort of "rescue mill" and intervene faster.

I'll assume those two dogs are pet dogs - but hopefully the RSPCA will still check in to make sure she has capacity to care for the two and they dont get treated like the rescue dogs :(

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

If she was a carer, where is the checking and due diligence from the rescue group?  Vetting of foster carers should be a no brainer for an ethical rescue group.  Sadly ,anyone can set themselves up and call it a rescue group , when it can be anything but good rescue.  It seems any donations here weren't being used for the animals' benefit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 16/03/2019 at 1:39 AM, ~Anne~ said:

To be fair to PR, it’s a different contact name. Perhaps the woman charged was one of several in the group, or a carer for the group only.

Expand  

She was the founder of the group. And I'd be willing to bet money that whoever is named as the new contact for PR, is someone very close to her. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 02/03/2019 at 2:49 AM, Maddy said:

Good to see that PR were quick to shut down their account.

Oh wait.. https://www.petrescue.com.au/groups/11544/Couch-Surfers-Animal-Rescue- :|

Expand  

 

PR have deleted accounts for less than that.

Apparently 'gross misconduct'' will get you removed so maybe animal welfare charges don't count if you change the contact name. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...