Steve

Me either.

So the RSPCA police their competition and then simply takes em out and replaces them - Good grief.

:laugh: I was sent something today MN had written, she was demanding that people keep writting in supporting pound rounds. That there were not enough comments to support their stance Also sent something to say she was gobsmacked that she had not been contacted in regard to a very lengthy letter she had written to council. Not a happy camper at all! Delusions of grandeur.

Yes correct however, I havent witnessed what Tralee is saying sometimes occurs when judges approach.if they are doing something that is so far out that it couldnt be anticipated by the handler or the dog then Id like to hear more about that and discuss the possible solutions without the need to disregard out of hand what he has to say.

Well this is what is frustrating me - in fact at times it is as if we are talking about a different breed altogether. My dogs have beautiful temperaments,they are not dirty nor untouchable. They are wary of strangers however, and would prefer not to be touched or handled by strangers but I believe thats because there has never been a need for me to have them accustomed to this . In my experience with the breed over 22 years they are able to adjust to any lifestyle and any situation as long as the owners have ensured that is what they are exposed to and the dog sees as normal. In my experience what the dog determines is normal is accepted and its as if they have an on and off switch. therefore exposing the dog to a judging type situation from an early age should elicit the required behaviour for it to be approached and handled by a judge in that situation.I would expect when it comes home and goes back to work that it would prefer not to be touched and make that known. For example they will let anyone touch them on my porch because they have worked out that if I allow you on my porch its O.K. to do that - one which works with sheep and which has been in a paddock since she was 6 weeks old will actually go after a pat and want visitors to touch her. But she would never accept that as easily when she is in the paddock with her sheep. She is a brilliant worker and has never ever, lost a lamb or sheep to foxes which are as thick as thieves around here. So I'm leaning toward an opinion that if you are going to show them and require them to cope with that then it should be a simple case of exposing them to it and the type of situations it will need to consider normal when its on lead. I dont think that being wary of strangers means impossible in all situations for a Maremma to be handled or examined. My concern is that some comments seem to attack Tralee personally and that takes the discussion out of my comfort zone.

In all honesty some of the things that are being said here are in my opinion a bit off the mark and Tralee has some valid points would be good just to discuss and debate the subject because as I don't show my dogs and never will do so personally its a part of the breed I've never considered in much detail but it appears by some to be about going after Tralee again and Im not up for it. There is one thing I know about Tralee and that is 100% his intention is what is best for the breed and I dont believe its just about his dogs not winning or him making excuses etc I dont always agree with him but thats part of what makes discussing things important so we can test what we think we know.

As you would know we don't operate Pacers any more but as Im moving through the nominations its clear there is a huge need at the moment in Queensland due to the floods for some foster carers to try to prevent those people affected by flood having to surrender their dogs.One I heard the story of this morning is a small cross bred pug who really needs someone to care for him until his owner can have him back home with her. Complicating this situation is the fact that Bundaberg shire council don't want foster carers in their shire and a couple of other council related issues which I dont have time to go into more thoroughly These dogs are currently located in the Burnett Shire - many have come in from Bundaberg so ideally the closer to that shire - but not Bundaberg- would be preferable. Seriously there really are some people who have already surrendered their dogs and others who people are trying to help find somewhere for them to stay and the dogs are at risk. There is a huge need for foster carers for those which have already been surrendered and those which are at risk of this if anyone has been thinking they may give fostering a go and you live reasonably close, can take in an extra dog without it creating a problem for you now would be a good time to put your hand up. Happy to PM you the details of the Rescue group that is in the thick of it all with contact numbers. Julie

Leema. People have been coming in here and lamenting that dogs with unsound temperaments have been placed without assessment in the community. That is evidenced by examples given of dogs killing other dogs, dogs being human and dog aggressive when they get to their new homes.Families and dogs have suffered because of this. I believe anyone who is doing the TT knows the issues and will give the dogs the best chance possible and whilst testing them isn't a perfect solution its better and quickly implemented than any real alternatives that have been presented. You cant just keep on and on hammering about what the problem is without trying to find a solution. If PR are so convinced that this isn't a viable solution then they or someone is going to have to come up with something that will be.Protesting and making threats etc is not going to take them anywhere except give them less credibility and less chance of anyone working with them. The chances of finding a better solution which doesn't take a truck load of money and administration is negligible and PR are responsible for the fault in the system being exposed and made public.

They don't believe that dogs should be assessed they want to save them all.

Yes of course in my opinion any group which is taking animals should be screening the adopters but the only reason PR has been able to do what they do is because its perfectly legal for them to do it and dogs have been let out to PR, other rescue groups and private individuals which shouldnt have been unless there was a formal agreement with said rescue group to do these things. If someone is now doing temp testing and as a result some dogs which are determined not good for human companionship and the community don't make it then so be it. Something had to give you cant have people complaining about how someone or some group can get dogs out of pounds and allow them to go into homes and the community without screening and lament it over and over and over and not expect some kind of action. The two alternatives are laws which will govern pounds, shelters and small and large rescue groups or a system and protocol which will ensure rescue groups do what we think they should - make it policy. For now having better temp testing is the easiest cheapest option.

Me too and I just don't get what it is people want - any dog PR had organised for released could have been released to anyone .There are complaints they dont temp test that they are putting unsafe dogs in the community but they are released by the pound to ordinary every day people whether they found the dogs via PR or not. If the dog is being adopted Steve families go through the shelter adoption process and they pay the shelter the adoption fee. If it is being pulled/adopted under pr's 16D (free of charge) the dog is chipped to MN/ pound rounds not the person/family who is then responsible for the dog. Pound rounds pull the dog out under clause for free (or close to it) the family arrive and pick the dog up without any costs at the shelter after they have paid a $180 adoption fee to pr's (who may not have ever met the dog). The vetwork for the dog is paid for through donations from the public pr's facebook site. Then pr's collect the adoption fee of $180. All transport, kennelling and even bathing is extra for adopting families and also factored into the adoption fee by pr's. Families must pay these fees if they stumble upon the pr's site, see a dog and decide to assist it via pr's. As I have already stated over and over again; Dog brokers at the very best Nic we are talking about Blacktown and I dont know what adoption process you mean the families go through but as far as I know families are not screened in any way - they say they want the dog and they take the dog. Whether the pound or a rescue group gets the money isnt the issue here - any rescue group with a 16D can do the same thing and unless they have a system and process in place to ensure that any dogs they let out to rescue only are treated differently they shouldn't be doing it.

What normal adoptions checks? They have been releasing dogs to the highest bidder and to anyone who says they will take them .

Its simple dogs are now being assessed and temp tested and only those who pass get to go to new homes and move around the community. Pretty shocking isnt it?

Agreed.

Me too and I just don't get what it is people want - any dog PR had organised for released could have been released to anyone .There are complaints they dont temp test that they are putting unsafe dogs in the community but they are released by the pound to ordinary every day people whether they found the dogs via PR or not.

But dont they rel;ease dogs to anyone who asks for it - not just groups?

If dogs are going to be released to anyone who asks for them then surely there has to be an assurance they are user friendly - so whats the answer ?

Breeders arent just concerned that their property rights and privacy rights are disregarded they also have to be concerned about their dogs in these type of night time raids. There have been several instances where dogs were moved from one pen to another so it looked like more than 2 dogs were in each pen. Where dogs have been stolen - perfect example of that is Oscar himself who was stolen and desexed and had to be returned to its owner and a long list of other accusations which occur as part of their raids. There are numerous examples of where lies are told and false and misleading crap that literally ruin people's lives. Where breeders are up all night watching for spot lights - too frightened to leave to go to the doctor in case it leaves their dogs vulnerable Believe it or not dog breeders - most of us actually love our dogs and want to protect them from nutters who want to take the law in their own hands.Many of us a parents who dont want their kids frightened of strangers prowling around in the night breaking the law to suit their own purposes. Many of us are single alone vulnerable. Many of these people are un hinged , illogical and talk them selves and each other into believing anything that supports what ever idea they have ,if they dont have enough real things to sting someone with they make it up. Straight up straight out lies not mistakes or misunderstandings - full on straight out lies. They are comprised of ratbags, fanatics and loonies why would anyone want them creeping around their homes? Why on earth would you expect that we should as a society condone them doing that in order to gather their evidence.

The RSPCA are charged with investigating complaints so are councils and the police and if evidence is to be gathered then they have ample powers to legitimately enter and record and determine the facts. And yes 100% Im more concerned with how the "evidence" is collected rather than what is presented as evidence APPEARS to show. Like it or not breeding dogs is not an illegal activity in this country ,breeding cross bred dogs is not illegal and being a registered breeder and breeding cross bred dogs as long as they are not your registered dogs is within the law and the governing bodies regs. Just because some people think this shouldn't be done doesn't make it O.K. to hunt and intimidate and break laws to punished them without natural justice. How can they make a distinction between one breeder and another based on whether they happen to be members of one group? In Victoria for example there are many many registered breeders who dont own a registered dog who breed cross bred dogs, who breed purebred dogs which are never registered etc because if you happen to be a registered breeder in Victoria you get to have the same exemptions as purebred registered breeders so they join up and have equal status. Why is it that because any person believes its better to breed purebred registered dogs that this automatically makes it a punishable crime if they breed cross breeds or they breed more than someone else? Why dont we just say that anyone who owns a dog is a potential animal abuser and give them a tick to prowl around anyone who owns a dog's back yard in the night to try and catch them out on not letting the dog sleep in the house because some people think all dogs should sleep inside on satin pillows? If they catch one out now and then who is keeping their dogs in rotten conditions is it O.K. to leave all dog owners with no rights or maybe we should just cjheck up on thise who own cross bred dogs and cheer about another one being exposed as a rotten pet owner. If a neighbour goes to animal rights before they go to the RSPCA and the accused neighbour has night time visitors and has their name all over the world as an animal abuser before it is looked at is that O.K.? Dont tell me its O.K. if people creep around your property in the night and take photos of you ,where your dog sleeps, where it poops, taking photos of you throwing it a bone keeping tabs to see if you take it for a walk or how often or how long you walk with it to use against you and go after your personal private papers and publish them etc because you have nothing to hide - try living with it. Try living with your dogs knowing that because you happen to be a dog owner you have no rights and that people who are breaking the law and have a record of dishonesty are given credibility and you cant even defend yourself because you have been named and accused as an animal abusing dog owner. I dont want to have to defend anything relating to people who are breeding dogs I don't know are doing the right thing but if we give a tick to the ones we dont agree with being treated this way then we have no case to complain about if someone else or the same people tomorrow don't agree with the type of dogs we breed or that we happen to breed at all. Yes it is about how the "evidence is collected"

Lets assume for a minute that the accusation is right and that people should have to loose their rights when they own breeding dogs and that these dogs were being poorly treated. How has anyone helped the dogs? How has this type of action prevented those dogs from being poorly treated. They have been moved off the property and maybe living in worse conditions than those being discussed here. Please don't tell me to take any notice of photos taken illegally and splashed around the net because I know that photos have been presented in the past which were not as they were reported to be and when photos are taken when evidence is being collected there is a protocol for good reason. I know that the type of people who are prepared to conduct illegal activity are capable of telling lies, distorting the facts and tagging their victim with anything they can imagine to create something that doesn't exist. As far as assuming that because "fellow breeders were concerned enough to take action" is concerned if we were going to use that as criteria for believing there was a problem that will take us no where and more to the point if fellow breeders were concerned why didnt they speak to her , offer her help, call the RSPCA ? If fellow breeders are responsible for getting this mob involved to stitch someone up before going to the RSPCA then sorry Im not giving any pats on the back for that. If they cared about the best outcome for the dogs and not just stitching someone up etc then they should stick to the rules and call those who are charged with policing them. Whats more it appears to me that the "registered breeder" has been in the main vindicated anyway.

O.K. Great now I know where they are.

Julie, thank you! :) The geography is a bit of a bugger. They are 2.5 hours out of Adelaide CBD in a fairly remote area and it seems a lot of the people out there are quite happy to dump their unwanted dogs on them but not so willing to help them out. I have sent them a message with your details, I hope they consider your offer. Can you give me some town names which are in the general area so I can have a look and see if we have listed anyone who is ready to jump in and help around where you are?

Cute - we can do that but I think we can do better than that as well so its not just a band aid. But I need more info.

Ive got all of that stuff handy - also a list of people who have already stated they would like to do some volunteer work in SA with dogs I could contact though Ive no clue about the geography . Need to know if they have approvals for fundraising as well so we know how far we can go and what type of fundraising to help them to get to a point where they can have people paid rather than just relying on volunteers . Im up to my eyeballs in the awards so cant afford too much time to track them down but if anyone knows them Im happy to have a chat and see what they need and how we can help. Julie 0269276707

O.K. So how do we help them? When they induct a foster carer they only need a policy of providing them with info on what they want them to do when an animal is injured to eliminate the need for stress about unwanted vet visits and if they advertise for a volunteer to supervise the foster care program they may just get someone fantastic to help out. Someone who can do the admin work but isn't able to physically volunteer on that level. This is not my business as they are not MDBA rescue members but surely they should get a bit of a hand ?