tdierikx

So, it's ok for the shelter to keep the dog in a kennel/enclosure 24/7, but adopters can't have it sleep outside ever, even if it's inside at all other times? Double standards much?

I'll bet that the dog wasn't sleeping rough at it's new home, but would have had decent bedding, etc...

It's stories like this that give rescues a bad name.

T.

I swear that my current foster puppy thinks his name is "no" or "uhh" sometimes, as he hears both a lot! The reality is that he's high energy and easily aroused, and needs strong boundaries enforced so he'll grow up as a good canine citizen. He's only 10 weeks old, but the earlier he learns what is acceptable and what is not, the better he will do once he's adopted into a new family. We have gone from him being a complete maniac demanding attention all the time, to a much calmer and less clingy little fellow in just a couple of weeks. He sleeps in his crate overnight like a true little pro, and he settles in his big playpen and doesn't annoy the neighbours with whinging or barking if I have to go out for any period of time. He is free running the house and yard when I'm home (most of the time), and toilet training is slowly coming together... he gets to just inside the back door to do his poops, and has managed to do a couple actually outside on his own... yay! He is starting to understand what is required of him in that area of training. He also has worked out that if he sits like a good boy and looks up at me with his good boy puppy eyes, he gets cuddles and pats, but if he's jumping up or mouthing, he gets ignored or told "no" or "uhh" until he sits calmly... then he gets his cuddle/pats. He has also learned to be a good boy when on the couch with me, settling down for a nap or just cuddles. We both nanna nap on the couch at regular intervals.

Personally, I think this little fellow will be really good at dog sports, as he's actually highly biddable, but high energy. He is also highly praise driven, rather than wanting food rewards, which I think is much better, as one may not always have food on hand to get their dog to do what they need to do. He also loves his toys, so those could be used instead of food for rewards too. He's pretty good at his recall already too, as he had to learn that quickly when I had my other foster with a dodgy knee who wasn't allowed to play zoomies with this little one, so calling the little one back when he wanted to play hard with the other foster was a paramount need.

Laying ground rules early while a pup is still young sets them up for much greater success when we rehome them IMHO.

T.

17 hours ago, Powerlegs said:

Ok but tell me people, is it against the law to keep a native animal without a permit?

Yes... you need a permit to keep native wildlife... and only certain species can be kept under a permit. Most permits relate to certain species of birds or reptiles only - native mammals/marsupials cannot be kept. Wildlife rehabilitators have a different type of permit, as their holding of native animals is supposed to be only temporary.

As for wildlife rehabilitators taking orphaned baby mammals/marsupials to raise and eventually release to the wild, the harsh reality is that most of those animals don't actually survive very long once released... but what the heck, they sure make for great photos to use for fundraising, don't they?

T.

The fact remains @Powerlegsthat Molly has successfully transitioned to being free ranging with the local wild bird population now, but still comes "home" at intervals to hang out with his family and get himself extra food and interspecies friendship. I have no doubt that Molly's journey has been significantly different to a naturally raised wild bird, but do not doubt that this family have had his welfare at heart. He is happy and healthy and chooses where and when he will interact with either the wild population, or his adopted family.

Magpies are smart birds, and there are numerous (read myriad) stories of them choosing to have relationships with humans and other animals throughout history... this is just another one of those stories, but with the advent of social media, it can and has been shared much further than such relationships have been in past eras. Raising money to get themselves some stability in a rent to buy property so that Molly could establish his connections to the wild population, but still providing safe haven when he chooses it is not beyond the scope here IMHO.

As for the book and calendar(s)... why not? It's a beautiful story and a beautiful relationship that this family is sharing with Molly. It's hardly providing a livable income for them either.

T.

Quote

Under the proposed Animal Protection Act, certain traits would be defined in dogs that can cause "pain, suffering or damage".

OK, there are 2 problems here...

1. the name of the Act - "Animal Protection Act" - the word "protection" in this instance is a word that has been hijacked by the animal rights movement to have people believe that animals are generally grossly abused on a daily basis, and that all human interaction with animals should be severely restricted. These pieces of legislation used to be called Welfare acts... with animal welfare as the core tenet... but now the tenet has shifted to the notion that animals now all need protection from humans. Animal protection is NOT animal welfare... they are two vastly different things.

2. that can cause "pain suffering or damage" - this is deliberately vague wording which will allow any number of perceived "issues" to be added to the list of banned "defects" deemed "genetic"... when we all know that some issues have an environmental component which are completely beyond a breeder's means to prevent - ie. hip displaysia. HD can be limited in the genetic sweepstakes by selectively breeding dogs with good structure, but it cannot be completely prevented from a breeder perspective when environmental conditions while a larger breed pup is growing are so diverse. Under this sort of legislation, HD could be added to the list of traits, and that could lead to many larger breed dogs effectively unable to be bred... a stretch, but still completely possible when we are seeing a stronger push by animal rights agendas driving animal related legislation.

T.

Thank dog for someone showing some common sense rather than dogged adherence to stupid legislation. This was the only solution to providing the best welfare outcome for Molly.

And shame on the people who doggedly pursued having him taken away from the only safe place he's ever known.

I certainly do not advocate that people look to taking on native wildlife as "pets", but in cases where it has happened as a result of humans caring for a sick/injured animal, and that animal has decided of it's own free will to stick around, then there needs to be some process in place that looks for the best welfare outcome for that animal, regardless of what strict legislation advises. In this case, letting Molly stay where he feels safe, and his needs are being met, is the best welfare outcome.

T.

2 hours ago, Powerlegs said:

Same as when we get upset that people keep stray pets they find without following proper procedure.

Oh dog, don't get me started on the "hero rescuers" that yell at people to not take strays to the pounds or RSPCA. Watching these people then scramble to "find room" to take on any stray cat that looks even vaguely like a purebred (and most obviously someone's actual pet), while ignoring the average tabby moggie en masse... grrr!

Quite frankly I have no objection to anyone sharing their lives with a wild animal, if the arrangement is not detrimental to any of the participants, which is the case with Molly and his family.

DESI have the power to grant a license to Molly's family and to return him to the life he knows and loves... just sayin'... Molly DOESN'T have to be caged for the rest of his life just to prove some point.

T.

2 hours ago, Rebanne said:

they don't want to lose face

And to hell with what is the actual best welfare outcome for Molly... we must stick to the law regardless he'll actually be WORSE off that if he'd been left where he was... FFS!

Here's a link to the "expert wildlife carers" whose constant reporting of Molly's lifestyle caused him to be taken away from everything he's ever known and doomed to be caged for the rest of his life... https://www.facebook.com/wildanimalsaustralia/posts/pfbid0hzHgCnDWirrRh7WRTtt9Cz6QuRw8B1dkKgC6bdCRToHxpe8LT3FzmYDH4jGAKwPVl

Feel free to share the link to the above far and wide, so everyone knows what bastards they are.

T.

They are going to be on A Current Affair tonight...

T.

To my knowledge Molly was happy and healthy in his (Molly is a male) chosen home, so why the urgency to take him away and subject him to a life in a captive cage for the rest of his life? All for what?

The owner of Peggy and Molly had gotten a license to keep Molly, but still that wasn't enough?

All because some "wildlife carers" decided that they knew better and hounded the department until they had no choice... grrr!

Where is the positive welfare outcome here? He can't be released to the wild according to the "experts", but had been happily integrating with the wild magpies at his home, only coming back to be with Peggy and the family at irregular intervals. Now he will be confined to a caged environment with limited area to explore or choice to be with his local mates (and human/dog family)... it sucks!

Molly had a life that most magpies would dream of having... humans happy to attend to his every need, sweet tempered dogs to cuddle up to and chase about, and the freedom to come and go as he pleased. I ask again, what "better" welfare outcome will be provided for him now?

T.

The rescue I'm fostering for charges around $1000 for small puppies, and around $600-650 for adult dogs.

 But then, take into account that my foster boy Prince has had a weightloss journey with very expensive metabolic diet food, then had TPLO knee surgery ($4700), and now his other knee is unstable and the rescue will be paying for any surgery that may require in the future... $650 doesn't even go anywhere near covering the costs of his care to date.

I say if a rescue can get a decent adoption fee for a desirable type of dog, then go for it... the "profit" will simply go towards those dogs whose fee doesn't cover the costs of their care.

That said, one could get a pedigreed purebred dog for $1500 and up... the choice is in the purchaser's hands, yes?

T.

The issue @coneye, is that there are too many people who think that they have their dogs "under control", but in all honesty, they don't. It only takes one incident we haven't factored into the equation and it could be game over for that dog, another dog, or even a human.

Quite frankly, the most dangerous places to take a dog nowadays are designated off leash areas, as those frequenting them seem to think that it's a free for all playfest, and their dog that is snarking all the others is "just wanting to play". Most pet owners are completely clueless about their pet's body language, and all of the laws we should be following when we want to go out in public with them. Easier to just go for a nice leashed walk with your dog somewhere else and avoid that particular nightmare methinks.

As our society moves towards higher densities of humans and animals we will face ever increasing issues. Gone are the days when kids and dogs used to free roam together and only come home when mum called that dinner was on the table... sad, but also our new reality.

T.

19 hours ago, persephone said:

T- when is your book coming out? 

Hahaha! Not about to let the whole world know that I might have taken my eye off the ball long enough to get hurt by animals in my care... errr!

As for your heifer incident... I've had that happen with an emu... he thought I was his one and only, and it got to the point that I couldn't enter his enclosure during mating season, as he'd beeline straight for me to love me long time... lol! He was a lovely boy outside of mating season though, and I even managed to teach him to roll onto his back for tummy rubs...

Further to the horn in the face by the goat, I was left with an impressive shiner, and when other staff asked me what happened, I told them I'd asked the boss for a raise... lol!

Funnily enough, the only injury that had me take time off work was the pig vs thumb incident, as I couldn't wield a rake or shovel for a couple of days. Leg injuries slowed me down a bit, but judicious strapping with vetwrap and tape stabilised the leg enough to get on with the job.

Even the time I was hospitalised by the horse, as soon as I was discharged the following morning, my mother dropped me off at school.

The first day I visited my friend's monkey sanctuary, I got slapped upside the head by a cheeky macaque as I was locking the enclosure door - taught me to keep an eye on exactly where the monkeys were at all times... luckily I only got slapped, not grabbed and bitten. Also taught me to NEVER become complacent around animals... especially exotic ones you don't know intimately.

People might remember the incident at Shoalhaven Zoo where the keeper was mauled by the 2 lions... I know that person, and she wins all the scar competitions. It is very sobering to see the scars though... she is lucky to be alive. She takes all responsibility for what happened, as she had not double checked that the slides to the outside area were shut before entering the dens to clean up. The 2 young lions had only wanted to play with her, there was no intent to actually hurt her, but we just aren't built to play with a cat (or 2) that weighs over 150kgs. Note that she had hand raised them from small cubs, and knew them intimately.

I think the takeaway from all animal related incidents is that complacency and/or lack of education on the actual dangers of living/working with animals are key factors in all incidents... especially with companion animals. We seem to have shifted from looking at them and treating them as animals, and expect them to behave like furry children, which they are NOT.

T.

I can't say that I've had any incidents requiring a trip to the doctor or hospital with any dogs that have lived with me - either my own or the hundreds of fosters I've had over the years.

As a teen, I got kicked in the ankle by a calf that had me in emergency getting xrays - nothing broken, but some tendon damage.

Also as a teen, fell off a horse which then fell on me - one night in hospital - 3 cracked ribs, a broken collarbone, and a broken toe. Horses are heavy!

When I shared a house rental, I tripped over the resident cat in the middle of the night, causing me to stumble and break a toe on a table leg... ouch - but didn't go to hospital. Toe was obviously broken, so I strapped it to the next toe and got on with hobbling about for a few weeks.

Working at a petting zoo, tripped over a curious piglet and smashed my knee - cracked the kneecap and messed up tendons, and a small cut as well. Turns out that you can get up and run a short distance with a broken knee when faced with six 30kg piglets coming at your face as you lie on the ground groaning.

Also at petting zoo, damaged cactus thumb trying to catch an escaped piglet - little bugger ran past me and I tried to grab it, but it headbutted my thumb.

I don't remember which petting zoo animal helped me tear my thigh muscle.

Horned in the face - about 1cm from my eye and temple - when hoof trimming a fractious goat.

Nailed on the hand by a cat when I was a student vet nurse. It got me on the vein with a single claw hook. Had to get a tetanus shot and ABs for that one.

Considering the high exposure to so many animals over the years, I've been surprisingly injury-free I'd say. Can't say if it's down to good luck or good management... probably a bit of both... *grin*

T.

6 hours ago, mrpickleman96 said:

In most public streets there is no rules/laws that state you must leash your dog

 I think you will find that there are actually laws stating that dogs must be on leash unless in a signed off-leash area. Just because there aren't signs every 100m telling you to leash your dog, doesn't mean that it's not the law. I suggest you look up the local laws in your LGA to find out the actual reality here... and leash your dog. Some councils even state the length of the leash required...

T.

There is no actual law (in NSW anyways) that says that you have to be a registered breeder to sell a pup/kitten for more than $500... more likely a Gumtree rule...

T.

6 hours ago, Deeds said:

The difference is with amstaffs and pitbulls is when they attack they do more damage than other dogs due to their jaws and how they can latch on.

 

 

Any large breed dog can inflict massive damage or cause death more readily than a smaller breed dog... but that doesn't necessarily mean we should ban all large breed dogs, does it? AmStaffs/Pitbulls (or most bull breeds) do not "lock" their jaws as is the commonly claimed myth, but they do have powerful jaw muscles that make it hard to prise the jaw open once they bite down.

T.

Considering that pitbulls were banned from import into Australia in 2011, and you can't legally breed them, I'd say that there probably aren't too many pure pitbulls around.

The issue then arises around identifying a dog as a pitbull (or cross thereof)... and the fact that crossbred dogs may not have the same temperaments or inclinations as any breed in their mix... BSL just can't work to reduce dog attack statistics. Seizing and killing any pet based just on what it looks like is not the answer here. Seizing and destroying a dog that has shown certain inclinations is a whole other ballgame, and rightly so... there is no place in society for any dog that has shown such inclinations.

The identification issue was brought up by numerous witnesses in the recent Qld inquiry relating to this topic, but none have any real hope that the government will listen to that information/advice.

T.

Any bull breed cross with a "red" nose will be identified by rangers as a pitbull - regardless the red nose comes from kelpie or other similarly coloured breeds in the mix.

This is another strong reason why people shouldn't just buy a "cheap" or "trendy" dog type from unregistered breeders. With a pedigree there is no doubt as to what type of dog you are getting... or the traits inherent in them. It's going to be a mixed bag in a crossbred litter every time.

T.

The survey itself only attracted some 30,000 responses, and only around 5000 were used to produce the stats... so I'd take the results with a grain of salt.

T.

Qld are currently trying to legislate BSL... despite pretty much every animal welfare, industry or training body advising that it has been tried before in many jurisdictions and it simply DOES NOT WORK...

T.

OI! Albert! You need to listen to mummy LG and leave your owwie/itchy bits alone mate...

My foster boy Prince had big knee surgery and has been a good boy not licking or chewing his owwie bits... be a good boy like Prince, OK?

T.

20 hours ago, Sandrake said:

I will admit to what happened. I asked council to rectify the time and they didn’t. There should be some leniency from the member. Council only wants revenue. I am seeking understanding of the situation, that’s all! Everyone just pays their fines because of the hassle that comes with it when trying to make yourself understood. Council is very happy to get the money. They don’t reason with you. 

There will be little leniency from the court if you pursue this matter... that is simply a fact, OK? You have admitted the offence occurred, and it wasn't the first time your dog had gotten out and upset the complaining neighbour. If your dog wasn't wearing a collar and tag with your details on it, they will most likely pursue that as an extra charge, on top of the "at large" you are currently being asked to pay for. They could also throw in "menacing", as the neighbour was possibly frightened by your dog rushing towards them. They could then also throw in "not under effective control". Add all of that up, and then add council's court appearance costs, and it could be a rather pricey endeavour for you. The court could also order that your dog be further contained in a pen of some sort in your yard to make sure that it doesn't escape in future... and that's gonna be a big hassle for you to have to pay for and build to specific requirements - if your dog is declared "menacing"...

If, by some twist of fate, you win the court case, that will be recorded by council, and any further escapes will have the book thrown at you... and they won't be making any mistakes for any further breaches of the law. Do you really need that extra scrutiny? In the end it will be the dog that may suffer from your fervour in pursuing this matter now.

In all honesty mate, I'd just suck it up and pay the current fine, chalk it up to experience, and make darned sure that your dog can't leave your property unless you are in control of it. It's not worth the possible outcome for your dog to pursue it because council got the time of day slightly wrong on the infringement notice.

Just one final question... would you be pursuing this matter if the ranger had changed the time as you asked, or are you simply reacting in kind to their indifference to your request?

T.

13 hours ago, Deeds said:

It doesn't matter if the 1st escape was an accident.  You can still be fined for it because it's an offence under the NSW Animal Companion Act.

Definitely. But my point was more along the lines of knowing your dog has gotten out once before, there should be more care that it doesn't happen again. Council Rangers will usually give a little leeway and only issue a warning for a "first offence", but are more strict for repeat offences.

The fact that the dog ran across the road to say hello to the neighbour worries me too... what if a car had been coming and the dog got hit? The owner would have a fine for dog at large, repair bills for the car, and possibly a horribly injured or dead dog...

T.

16 hours ago, Sandrake said:

There is a lot of stigma in this neighbourhood against staffies. You cannot imagine .. people cross the road.

Seriously though, friendly staffy type dogs seem to have no boundaries when it comes to enthusiastically rushing up to complete strangers - and not so friendly ones will also rush at people or other animals... so if you aren't sure which type you are facing, it can be rather confronting to say the least.

As I said before, your dog escaping once is an accident... more than once is not so accidental... and unless you can show definitively that you have taken all possible corrective actions to avoid any escapes, I think you will find that you will lose in court. Relying on the error in recording the time of the incident will not be a defense, trust me.

Losing in court will result in a cost much more than the 300 you are in for right now. My advice is to pay the fine, and take this as a hard lesson as to what will or won't be tolerated in your neighbourhood, OK?

T.