WoofnHoof

I don't know if this has been discussed here but I couldn't find anything on it. The establishment of a government department that isn't linked to either agricultural industry or private entities would be a very good thing IMO :) http://www.awla.com.au/2013/01/independent-office-of-animal-welfare/ http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013B00118

Minister for what? Primary industries?

It's a charity with private interests and no accountability. It also has the power to prosecute people, this power should only ever be in public hands, the fact that it is in private hands is hugely concerning. The other areas of which you speak outsource certain responsibilities but when push comes to shove the department dedicated to the area (child welfare, employment etc) has the final say and the buck tops with them. This line is so blurred as to be non existent when it comes to animal welfare, RSPCA inspectors enforce the laws but are not bound by any of the accountabilities that public servants are, the organisation performs lobbying and activism as well as performing government responsibilities, and when there are conflicts of interest there is no control over it, you can report to the ombudsman but he has no one to go back to about it because there is no government agency enforcing compliance! The government doesn't even have a department of animal welfare it's just a sub branch of primary industries which is conflicting enough, and they have no governing power to prevent conflict of interest from the RSPCA or any questionable practices they may engage in.

Animal welfare regulation and enforcement should be the responsibility of government, not charities. But this will not be achieved by attacking the RSPCA or arguing over the culpability of the various levels within that organisation, it will be achieved by pressuring government into taking on the role rather than fobbing it off to charities. It is far better to present reasoned, rational arguments to this effect to the relevant bodies than go berserk about the RSPCA on a forum.

Thanks Griff :) This is the blurb that has been accompanying the clip on FB: And here is her wesbite and bio Stacy Westfall and the horse which she had trained from 2002-2008 Roxy I have no idea why anyone would fabricate such a story, but they do it all the time, that's why Snopes and Hoax Slayer exist.

Wouldn't be the first time. Exactly. A video of Stacey Westfall has been going around FB lately with the blurb stating that she is deaf and mute and had only had the horse a few weeks before the clip, all of which is completely false. Yet people still shared it Agree again, the only way to improve things regarding the RSPCA is to lobby for government intervention in animal welfare issues and getting the responsiblity for prosecution and enforcement into public hands not a private charity. Getting het up about unsubstaniated claims does nothing more than make people look irrational and hysterical, neither of which have ever achieved anything worthwhile.

A wonderful resource for rescue

I often go to the local one because the lure coursing club sets up their course there, it's the social event of the year for the dog lol

I think in the case of horses it's partially due to being a bit harder to prove that the owner hasn't been feeding and watering it, if it's in a paddock with grass and water available a lot of the inspectors don't have the education to recognise whether that is sufficient. I've made complaints about horses in the past and the inspector has come back with the tired old "It's got food and water, must be skinny because it's old". I've seen more underweight horses than I've had hot dinners, the lack of understanding of the basics of equine nutrition is depressing. The place where some of my horses are agisted does a lot of rehab of RSPCA horses, so they must be seizing (or getting surrendered) a fair amount of horses but it isn't following through to prosecutions.

Beautiful photo of some beautiful doggies :)

Agree. I totally understand that there are a lot of issues with the RSPCA and much of the distrust is certainly warranted, but jumping in with the hate without the information to support it is pointless and counterproductive.

Actually my point was that RSPCA aren't the only ones denying that they send horses to slaughter.

I bought three broodmares at an Inglis sale and the underbidder in each instance was a dogger. I doubt he was there because he liked the shade of the fig trees. Yeah the tried horse sales and old broodies is where the meat buyers and dealers go, Inglis doesn't just sell the yearlings and big money spinners.

Tracking for horses is woefully inadequate in this country, a similar statement was made by Inglis recently claiming they don't have any doggers/knackeries/meat buyers on their sales books when everyone knows they do, they are just under the names of private buyers who also happen to be working for or related to someone working for the meat industry.

Like I said earlier she's been a known figure in the horse world for a long time, people have been working for years to get the evidence for the RSPCA because she kept moving horses around and denying ownership of them. Regardless of what people think of the RSPCA or the media's attention grabbing tactics it has been known for some time that the woman took on more animals than she could adequately care for and refused help when it was offered, experienced horse rescuers were involved in gathering evidence and they are well able to ascertain the circumstances of the horses and how long they had been in care, I was first made aware of concerns with the condition of her horses more than two years ago, it has been an ongoing problem.

She has changed her plea http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/04/17/17/35/ex-police-trainee-admits-animal-cruelty

Lovely update Jelly was wondering how Roo was going (I couldn't view the vid you linked to btw not sure why but it wouldn't load), great to hear things are going well and you are able to have a holiday :)

As others have said a live animal is quite different to pretty much every other product out there, it's a little bit like an interview process, you are both aiming to achieve a good match. Asking for discounts can be perceived as devaluing the work the breeder has put in to produce quality animals, I realise that's not your intent but you do have to approach this purchase with a completely different mindset than you would the purchase of an inanimate object. I know plenty of people who earn far more than me who have said they would have put my dog down instead of get him the specialist surgery he needed to survive, so the size of your pay packet is irrelevant it's the value you place on it relative to the value placed on a living breathing creature that a breeder has brought into the world with care and love. Paying the asking price is showing respect for the breeder and for the puppy that is likely to be the result of generations of breeding for health, temperament and quality, you aren't just paying for this pup you are paying for the expertise and experience which has led to this pup, it's parents, it's grandparents etc. Many years of dedication to the breed and to dogs is priceless in a lot of ways, so that is why people have a very different view of prices of pups as opposed to other things. Hope you can sort it out and welcome home your new pup :)

The article wasn't written by the RSPCA it was written by a journalist. Apparently this woman is well known to horse rescue and there have been many accusations of neglect over the years, it appears that enough evidence has been gathered now to make a case.

Ah yes of course, thanks for reminding me why I stopped posting in your threads, I'd forgotten for a while there.

I've always liked the idea of a kind of mentor ship program where breeding dogs are placed as per a normal pet home but the home can have the option of allowing their dog to be used for breeding under the guidance of the breeder who owns the prefix. That way numerous dogs can be bred by the one breeder and with the benefit of the breeders experience and know how without the dogs having to be permanently housed and owners by the one breeder, negating many of the issues with housing tens or hundreds of breeding dogs on the one property. I realise this is something that many breeders already engage in with co ownership etc but if it were embraced and promoted at an organisational level it might also be used to grow the network of breeders and owners who are happy to work together with those aims and reduce the need to house large numbers of dogs on single properties.

One thing I'm confused about is that there seems to be some sort of overlap or interchangability between the behaviours of the dog being wary of the doll (which I would imagine a lot of dogs would be - including mine) and behaving agressively towards it.

The problem of course is presenting what should be a comprehensive test regime in snippets as part of a tv show. Whether the RSPCA delivers the test appropriately and interprets it accurately is of course unknown, more problematic is the subsequent extrapolation of this information that can be made by the general public. If Joe Blow sees his dog ripping up a toy doll is he then going to PTS the dog? That is the danger with a tv show focusing on entertainment rather than effective education, the whole story is not as important as the ratings.

He is a very cuddly fellow :)

A couple of cute pics from the mini show today, it's an awful clip job but it was the best I could do in my current state