All Activity

I certainly won't say BUT. On the contrary, I am the first to point out the failings of the RSPCA. There is so much more they could and should be doing. Like so many large organisations, they long ago became arrogant and believed their own publicity. They should go back to basis and act in accordance with their name. That is not to say there are not good people there. There are, but the old adage "a fish rots from the head down" is pretty well always true.

But remember this is the same org that pushed for how dogs are housed & if kennels arent scraped of water correctly after hosing its an its an offense. The RSPCA has no excuse to not have air conditioned facilities . And before anyone says BUT I own boarding kennels 2 big air cons one small no gov grants or people donating money or leaving money in wills . You provide what is required .

Exactly. Before gene testing for purebreds, and back when a "crossbred" was either truely random, or was a product of a farmer's thoughful landrace breeding, this might have been true for dogs. In the current environment, I'm not sure that this applies.

Well people can call them what they like , Ooodles , Groodels , Labadoodles , and any othr name you can think off , but to me they are and always will be MONGROOLS . whats more , if the people who bred these things tell you they are a responsible breeder of MONGROOLS , who do health checks , check there non existent pedigrees , care about what they produce , , not just in it hoping for big litters and 5 grand a pup ,, Then come see me i can sell You Sydney Harbor bridge very cheap , Honest . You cannot even say there trying to create a new breed because there not , there so many different Oodles , Groodles , labrdoodles , its obvious the only intention they have towards developing a breed is that the name ends in Oodle , and they can get 5 grand a pup , Wifes mate bought one of a puppy farm , she got sold a right load of crap , nervous little biter that shits everywhere and when its not doing that its hiding under the bed that privelige cost her $5500 , and hundreds if not thousands in puppy school , who by the way will not take it in anymore , they said it just runs to a corner shaking , vets fee's and now medicating it in the hop it will let someone pat it without weeing itself screaming and hiding under the bed shaking for 8 hrs , Will admit its got a bit better but has to take daily medication , and then it acts like its a Zombie ,, apparantly she knows a couple who bought from the same litter and theres are the same . Sooner these dogs do there popularity circle the better

I know this isn't the point of this thread, but I have just been talking to the rescuer for whom I foster (she has been doing this for over 30 years!!!) because she has just posted on her FB page looking for foster carers for four dogs who are coming from the RSPCA. The RSPCA (Yagoona) has 180 dogs there at the moment and they are not in air conditioning and it is 31C today and 39C tomorrow. That is just one place in Sydney; considering all the council facilities there must be hundreds if not a couple of thousand impounded dogs all over the place. It is such an awful situation. God knows how many cats and kittens there are in these facilities. And, yes, I did put my hand up for one of the dogs because there didn't seem to be enough takers and all I could think of was this dreadful heat. My a/con is already up and away.

i don't know how naming and shaming would help. One of the things I do when people ask about dogs or even just in conversation, is to point out the pitfalls, the best rescue organisation and stress the need to do their homework.

In theory. In practice, I wonder how much inbreeding occurs in most profit-focused enterprises producing “designer crossbreeds”. Buying unrelated dogs for breeding would be a drain on profits. Those enterprises would make larger profits if they kept dogs from early litters and bred them to each other or to their parents. Just yesterday, I saw a post on another forum, asking for advice. The poster’s “designer crossbreed” dog had just been diagnosed with NCL5 (Golden Retriever variant), a fatal, neurological, genetic disease which occurs in Golden Retrievers. Responsible Golden Retriever breeders DNA test for NCL and the gene is rare enough that it’s likely that the affected dog was inbred to an NCL carrier. Unfortunately, because the dog was a crossbreed, nobody thought to check for NCL until after 6 months of scans, specialist vet visits and deteriorating health and behaviour.

And don't get me started on 'extendable leashes'. Those owners that use these types of leash are never in control of their dogs. If another dog appears from around a corner or a young child, there is still risk of serious injury. The off leash laws still require demonstration of control in that a dog must respond immediately to their master's commands, extendable leashes though once again and as tdieikx noted, those dogs are still able to poop on their front yard despite being on a leash; where is that exercise of control? How quickly could such an owner regain control of their dog if urgently required?

Commendable, granted. However I cannot be sure that it wasn't he that in a fit of spite (given his aggressive response to me) put the large amount of poop on my lawn for me to deal with before the next time that I mowed. I have also had numerous people (mostly of one particular ethnic background that I won't identify) use my un-fenced front yard as a short cut and many tradies that have been working on neighbouring residential construction sites that also disrespect the property boundaries, parking their vehicles in front of my property and then crossing diagonally to the neighbouring site. This has become quite annoying so that when someone with a dog off leash, let's it enter the property (without calling it to heel), drop it's load and then proceed to also disrespect the property boundary, it is just infuriating. I'm sorry, I just cannot forgive such blatant disrespect.

No to naming and shaming. There is or was a FB group for that nonsense anyway. I've been through lies and attacks and threats on FB, via email, phone and internet. All because I stood up for myself and others. Long story best left behind. A gent contacted me yesterday. Really very cranky about a dog. Turns out it had nothing to do with me and he had the wrong rescue. He could easily have slammed me publicly instead of messaging. That's how easy it is to get 'named and shamed'.

I'm not necessarily a fan of this approach - there is a very fine line between what is "truth" and what is considered a legal defence against defamation and/or libel. Also, this sort of knee-jerk reaction to a rescue making mistakes (and occasionally even the very best rescues might make a mistake) only results in public distrust of ALL rescues, which is certainly not desirable. I will go so far as to say that most rescues are set up and run with the very best intentions with regard to tackling the problem of pet animal homelessness, just that some may over-simplify what their role actually should be in that sphere. Some have a focus on how many animals they can rehome as quickly as possible, ostensibly so they can take in more animals needing help, but this approach has some rather serious flaws in the way it may be applied, and the long-term welfare outcomes for the animals rehomed. Some rescues may focus on the harder cases that may take longer to rehabilitate before they can be rehomed, but that can also lead to issues if more animals are taken in than can adequately be cared for - and possibly become "hoarding" type situations if carers become too attached to the animals in their care. There really is no "one method" approach that is 100% perfect when it comes to rescue, as each animal taken into care will have it's own individual requirements before it should be considered for rehoming to the general public. Regulation of the industry would be able to set basic codes of practice for those operating within it. Those who don't follow those codes would then be accountable for breaches of those codes in a very real sense. Regulation is the sensible option now that the industry has become such a large part of the pet animal sector. T.

Maybe some naming and shaming would be helpful for the general public. I am not suggesting to do that on this forum, but elsewhere. Truth is a solid defence against defamation.

Poodles are a great breed, very intelligent and highly trainable! And I think they are a good breed to cross with (not any poodle, a GOOD poodle). The complaint I hear most from people who have bought poodle crosses is colour fade and that is down to people's ignorance and hybrid breeders' not managing expectations or lying outright to people about adult colours. I produced a litter of AT X Mini poodle and the pups were great! I was going for scruff over fluff and lucked out with four of the six having more open terrier coats and two with poodle coats which needed regular clipping like the poodle. I ran one pup on until he was 6 months and kept his coat long because I enjoyed combing it and was prepared to do it thoroughly every day (our down time together, he really liked it), but wow I got super busy for two days and in that time the dogs had a dip in the pool and I didn't comb him out on his legs. I kid you not the next morning his leg hair was so tightly matted to his forelegs I had to carefully cut it off with scissors! That was one swim and two missed combing sessions. He looked hilarious after I trimmed his legs, like a puffy cloud on little sticks. His new owners were advised his coat should be kept short and I gave them the right comb and showed them how to comb him properly to prevent matting in between visits. They love him to bits and have him groomed regularly. Of course the two pups with the fluff coats looked SUPER DUPER cute as little pups, but for my personal preference the adult look of the other pups was completely charming to me - and interestingly the people who chose those pups seemed to all know AT's at some stage across their lives. Everyone was and still is over the moon with their very smart scruffy crosses.

Office of Local Government

The way you express yourself seems creepy. Your words come across as passive aggressive. The triple love hearts at the end of your message are very dark.

I agree, I have seen this too. It's pretty disturbing. I've come across two types, one is a person who needs to be needed and won't tolerate their animal progressing beyond severe dependance on them, and another other a type who is so hard themselves - so "old school" that they seem impervious to their animal suffering. And also many people who don't understand that most animals are very stoic and staunch (by way of instinct) and don't realise their animal is suffering. Or people who think some behaviours are just their animal's "quirks" and not indicating stress or anxiety. Or people who over respond to their animal's stress behaviours which tip the animal into global anxiety... what is OLG?

Well done Minnie. Looks like there is some Aussie Terrier in Minnie.

https://www.facebook.com/7NEWSAdelaide/videos/368242755657285/?mibextid=308UXlBs9A8XJry9

I would certainly prefer education over legislation, but when the only "education" getting out there is that of the bleeding heart sob stories that "all" rescue animals have some kind of issue, then I think something needs to be done legislatively to ensure that not fit for purpose animals are not being rehomed irresponsibly by well-meaning, but essentially clueless, people calling themselves "rescue". There are constant calls to ban all breeding of companion animals while our pounds and shelters are full, but the reality is that a very tiny proportion of the animals ending up with that fate are bred and homed by registered breeders - but it's those ethical and responsible breeders that become the easy target for authorities enforcing current and proposed legislation. Meanwhile the largely "underground" practice of backyard breeding carries on as normal, because apparently it's too hard to even attempt to sort that issue legislatively. As for the rescue industry, one only has to look at the OLG list of approved rescues - those who get exemptions from desexing and registration costs when taking animals from the pounds - there are only some 90-100 groups on that list, but just in Sydney alone, there are MANY more than that number operating. In order to get the OLG approval, rescues must commit to keeping a range of records about outcomes for animals in their care, and submit details about their foster carers - so those who don't bother with the approval process aren't required to keep any records at all, can have unsuitable foster homes that may be overwhelmed by having more animals foisted on them than they can appropriately care for in order to "save" as many as possible, and then there are those who are simply disguising other practices, such as hoarding and/or backyard breeding the animals they take in. In what sense of the word are those practices actually "saving" the animals in question? I'm sorry to harp on about it, but it's beyond time that the rescue industry was regulated legislatively. Those operating ethically and responsibly already will not have any issue with this concept. T. T.

We have a new person just moved into the area. He has 2 Golden Retrievers that are never on a leash. He opens his front gate to let them into our street to toilet. He uses our grass verge as his dogs toilet area. Never actually picks the poo up . Just pretends to pick it up.

Oh boy, does this resonate with me . Many years ago, I put my hand up to look after a woman's little dog as she had to make an emergency trip overseas. The little dog had several issues, but I was devastated when I met her: the woman had been less than honest and the dog was obviously brain damaged. I did all I could for this little girl, spending ages with her doing T-Touch (she could not be picked up) and trying to sooth her when she was distressed - which was a lot of the time. I spent several weeks just being sick at heart for this poor little dog who was never going to get better and lived her life in a state of constant stress and fear. When the owner returned, I was preparing dinner listening to the sound of my dogs playing on the couch. The woman came rushing in saying, "[LMO LMO] your dogs are fighting!!" This woman eventually branded herself as a dog trainer as she'd done some course on line. God help any dogs she supposedly trained. And, yes, I have had euthanised a little dog who lived her life stressed, afraid and angry and was a danger to me and other people who visited. Still haunts me to this day and I will always wonder if I could have done more.

Unkind. The poster was just looking for some answers, not provoking. She was asking to be informed. Being around dogs who need special care can often be dramatic (and traumatic) as you know well.

Regulation and education. We hear this over and over and over again - about any sort of industry. A report into the NDIS found $1.4bn lost to inefficiency and fraud. If a loss of $1.4bn of taxpayers' funds isn't enough to galvanise the powers into action, I can't imagine there will be too many people worrying about stressed and dangerous dogs and the unsuspecting people who end up with them. There are more than enough rules and regulations in place: it is the management and enforcement that are lacking. And quite often it is those who are supposed to be following and managing the rules and regulations who are turning a blind eye. Who do you suggest does the regulation and education? Councils? We all know councils are some of the most corrupt bodies around. I don't know what the answers are and the longer I live the more frustrated I become.

@PowerlegsPerhaps it wasn't clear that the surrendered dogs no longer had issues once in the right home. Gwen kept Beau herself. Except for the last dog mentioned who lived the remainder of his life on a chain until he developed cancer. I was only told he was a dangerous dog after he bit me, after being OK with me for years. There are people who need to be needed and seem oblivious or not bothered that their dog has issues and is not living a happy life. The more broken it is the better. It happens with children too. I wonder what consumer law would make of the not fit for purpose dogs?

People looking to rescue to source a family pet need some guarantee that the animal they are receiving is suitable for the task. Making excuses for poor socialisation or reactivity and expecting someone else to take that on is just not fair on the animal, or the new family it goes to. The aim for anyone rehoming any animal from ANY background should be that it is fit for purpose... T.