Shelter In Trouble - Coffs Harbour NSW

[~Anne~]

I've been thinking on the idea of a course some more - it would be ideal to propose it to a few Councils. I'd aim for those who have massive spend in animal control perhaps with the bottom line being they provide funding support to create the content and the delivery through an RTO (as an online course) and they save themselves money on their bottom line in expenses. 

 

I would have suggested OLG in NSW... but I'm not sure they'd see the bigger picture. They would be the ideal channel though, in NSW at least, as they oversee and govern Councils and the CAA Act. There would be a similar State Gov dept in every State.

[tdierikx]

Thanks for the awesome advice @~Anne~... once I've done my Cert IV Training and Assessment, I'll have to look at what content would be needed, and how best to deliver it in an affordable way for those interested in or already working in rescue. The best option IMHO would be as an elective in either Cert II or III Animal Studies at TAFE, but they are so darned slow at doing anything of that nature with courses... maybe a stand-alone cert of attainment might be easier to get off the ground, but may need a pre-req of at least the Cert II Animal Studies for the basics in animal care and handling component (just to negate the need to go over all the same stuff)

 

T.

[~Anne~]

You don't need to be a trainer - it needs a content writer and an online course developer. The only time a certification would be required, I would think, is to actually do the physical teaching. ie If it were a face-to-face or part F2F training situation.

 

The course would be best provided as an online course in my view. Online is accessible to most people. F2F courses cost mega dollars to facilitate. As it is, funding will be hard to come by so unless you have deep pockets...

 

Definitely agree it will be easier to get off the ground on its own, at least in the early stages, for a number of reasons.

 

Firstly - the current courses are offered by TAFE and a few other RTOs. It won't be easy getting them to spend money they don't have in adding a component to their current course. Course delivery costs money. Once the course is established, uptake is healthy, and they can see a return on investment, they may be more inclined to take it on.

 

Secondly - how many rescuers currently undertake animal studies courses? I'm guessing very few, so take-up will be only from those who are planning careers or work in an animal related field. Rescuers aren't planning a 'career', they're planning to save the world, one animal at a time. It needs to be a course for rescuers, specifically. It needs to be accessible, cheap (subsidised through funding perhaps) and targeted to prevent the failures and issues we currently see - especially if you're hoping to get funding.

 

It has to be a solution to a problem, and a way of saving money, not just a course to educate people.

[jemappelle]

Having taught in TAFE for way too many years, funding is the struggle.  Teachers want to teach quality but for anyone above teacher level it is all about results and funding.  It was very dis-heartening for long time teaching staff who started with quality teaching (plenty of hours and resources) and quality outcomes.

[tdierikx]

21 hours ago, ~Anne~ said:

Secondly - how many rescuers currently undertake animal studies courses? I'm guessing very few, so take-up will be only from those who are planning careers or work in an animal related field. Rescuers aren't planning a 'career', they're planning to save the world, one animal at a time. It needs to be a course for rescuers, specifically. It needs to be accessible, cheap (subsidised through funding perhaps) and targeted to prevent the failures and issues we currently see - especially if you're hoping to get funding.

 

With the way animal welfare legislation change is being proposed/changed, it's only a matter of time before the call for the rescue industry to be regulated is upon us... a move I actually support.

 

Some years ago, there was a rescue that encouraged it's volunteers to do animal related courses via TAFE, even going so far as to help towards course fees for any of their vollies who wanted to do them. I reckon that was an awesome initiative. They obviously saw the need for people in the industry to at least learn some of the basics in companion animal husbandry/care... but as there was/is no actual requirement to have any clue at all when getting into rescue, uptake was low. They saw quite a few vollies that decided to start their own rescues, some with some success, most not. Those that failed tended to just surrender their animals to other rescues and dropped off the radar.

 

In the current climate of increasing animal homelessness, it is so easy for any big hearted person to hang a shingle and call themselves a rescue, and there has been a veritable explosion in numbers of people doing so. As a result, we are seeing way too many cases of people overreaching their means, rehoming irresponsibly, and animals not being the "winners" by any stretch of the imagination. Legislation changes have also made the situation worse for anyone in rescue, as pounds look to offload their responsibilities onto the rescue industry - the reason such legislation was passed was purely financial, as it enabled government to effectively pass the buck - even if the original proponent of the change may have had (or was seen to have) good intentions for homeless animals in need.

 

Does it not worry anyone that those pushing for animal welfare legislation change do not have ANY animal related qualifications, rather a degree in human psychology, and a solid background in the extreme end of the Animal Rights movement? Does anyone think that a former PR staffer for PeTA should be the loudest "voice for animals" in our state parliament? So far, the effect of most of the legislation put through by such people has had repercussions that have had the opposite effect of what was supposedly proposed... the associated inquiries held with regard to the legislation changes clearly stated those negative repercussions would occur, but were completely ignored.

 

T.

[coneye]

Really is a Pandoras box is'nt it ,,, Unless the rescue home is financial  and making money , be it grants or donations or just some animal loving Billionaire , its always going to be hard to do it properly  , sooner or later  it will become overcrowded  and not the best place ,  Think what you need is  strict regulations on how they are kept and what conditions ,   be it 3-4 rescues or 100 , and unfortunatly those that cannot be rehomed ,   perhaps given to the RSPCA ,  after all they  do recieve massive amounts of funding  , perhaps put them in charge of    checking out and making sure rescue homes are up to scratch , then theres the problem they are a buisness and will not want competition . Don't think there a buisness , my current dog  had a hold put on him  , on day one of being there  , something  against there rules well at the time not sure now , but he had the hold put on him  and i was lucky enough to see him  on the last day  of the hold when the person who was in management there decided they didi'nt want him , i jumped at him but was charged $150  MORE than the normal price they stated , we can sell white fluffy dogs all year rnd so we want more than normal ,, i wanted him so i payed it . It really is a nest of worms  and facts are some animal lovers just love animals so much they can't see the woods for the trees ,  hard one  and councils will just pass the buck ,

[tdierikx]

15 hours ago, coneye said:

perhaps given to the RSPCA ,  after all they  do recieve massive amounts of funding

 

They do get massive amounts of money from public donations and government has given funding for infrastructure... but the actual reality is that they actually don't receive very much government funding to perform the enforcement of animal welfare laws. From memory, RSPCA NSW receives around $400,000(ish) a year from the state government to perform ALL of it's enforcement duties - not much when you look at the number of inspectors they need to have, their legal arm, etc... I think their latest annual report said they spent over $2 million on the enforcement arm alone last year.

 

That said, they also aren't subject to any real oversight by anyone either... so they have a tendency to basically do whatever they want - be that overzealous policing/prosecution at some times, or not doing anything at others.

 

I'm of the opinion that RSPCA should not be performing a prosecutorial part when it comes to their role in enforcement of our animal welfare laws. Quite frankly, it costs them more to do it than it actually makes from the resulting fines, etc...

 

T.

[coneye]

Only playing devils advocate here , but  besides  state govt grants there is council grants , personal donations of which theres a lot , selling of the animals  , most staff being volunteers , they make money , why else would they spend money chasing down and hunting  others   if not to  just keep control cut out opposition. Not to mention my local RSPCA   when you go in  has perhaps 200 kennels  but  only around  10 with puppys , 30 or so with  dogs for adoption which most are empty  and probably 150  segregated  all filled with  Boarding dogs  which is quite lucrative , which is why i suspect  the last couple of years you cannot just  roll up have a look walk around and fall in love with a rescue then buy it ,, you have to make an appoinment ,, Why , i think the reason is simple , they want the security        of keeping Joe public away from the boarding dogs

Edited February 2, 2023 by coneye

[~Anne~]

I think you're too cynical although the idea of keeping the public away form boarded animals sounds very plausible. Id imagine there's more to it though -  they're trying to run an organisation and having people walking freely throughout the kennels unannounced is a recipe for disaster in more ways than one, not just for OH&S but disease control, but process, time and efficiency. 

 

 

[coneye]

1 hour ago, ~Anne~ said:

I think you're too cynical although the idea of keeping the public away form boarded animals sounds very plausible. Id imagine there's more to it though -  they're trying to run an organisation and having people walking freely throughout the kennels unannounced is a recipe for disaster in more ways than one, not just for OH&S but disease control, but process, time and efficiency. 

 

 

Well i can't speak for all rspca shelters , but the boarding kennels in the one close to me  are segregated from the mostly empty ones with rescue dogs ,  regards being a disaster  why , it worked for the  40 years i know theve been there  , and its how i have bought 4 dogs from them over the years ,, just walked in off the street regular  had a look around  and when i seen the one i wanted i bought it gave it a great home  and everyone was happy in one case i bought 2 that were together mother and son boxer  they had been there a long time no one wanted to buy two together with one being old ,, i felt the same has the rspca they should'nt be seperated  so i took them both and saved them the needle they were shortly up for  , but it was the ability to just pop in have a look when i was close  until i found the right dog that worked , were not talking a private house here were talking   rows of kennels  all dogs in locked cages   but you had the ability  to just walk in and look ,  chances always were i would  go 4-5  maybee more times before i  found the dog i wanted , quite often just popping in when i had a spare minuite and was nearby ,, making 4-5 appoinments to suit there time frame means people taking time off work   , Nope i would'nt do it ,  Course its possible my local one is the only one that does it , i would'nt know , but i do know   a few months ago  i did go  to see about a playmate for the dog i have now ,, and was turne away  told to make an appoinment , then stood in line to try and make one  giving up and walking out after 20 maybee 30 minuites  , , not making an appoinment and  put it in the too hard basket , but who knows if it was like it used to be i may have had a good home for a rescue  and a mate for my dog ... I may be cynical but i don't think its bright  if your overcrowded with dogs like they claim to put obstacles in the way of prospective buyers . I just could'nt be bothered making appoinment after appoinment till i found the dog i like ... right or wrong who knows , but theres a saying , if its not broke , Don;t fix it . Cheers

Edited February 2, 2023 by coneye

[_PL_]

COVID has forever changed the way a lot of pounds and shelters were running with open doors and wandering members of the public. Appointments have become normal, and actually a more efficient way of managing staff duties such as feeding,  cleaning pens and shuffling dogs into dry ones or grass runs. 

[Little Gifts]

Our RSPCA (at the old location) used to also be the type where they opened the gates at a certain time and anyone could come in and wander around. There were never any staff around (even for us vollies to find) so only the really serious potential adopters stuck it out to find a staff member. So appointments could actually be a sensible idea all round.