tdierikx

He is such a stunning boy... T.

Looking good!!! Go you and Kane! T.

But @asal, there are some inspectors who do play fair... who only sieze as an absolute last resort... we know that for a fact, don't we? The system IS rigged to make it virtually impossible for the average Joe, but that doesn't mean that their tactics are completely foolproof. Unfortunately, the legal system is so fecking expensive if you want to fight any charges... but more often than not, when you do fight them through the system, the charges don't always stick. T.

RSPCA NSW has 532 paid staff... and 3140 volunteers. That's one hell of a free workforce, considering they rake in tens of millions in donations every year (32 million in 2018/19). 7.3 million reported as being spent on providing for all animals in their care - some 29,000 animals reported - so that is $251 per animal - but 9305 animals were either euthanaised (8990) or died in care (315) - that's 32% not making it out alive 102,110 received in fines (and 77 prosecutions commenced) - not a good return on costs involved to get that pitiful amount - when the cost of running the inspectorate was reported to be 5.8 million 67,128,718 in FREE media coverage... !!! Scary figures no matter which way you look at them, aren't they? T.

She's a bit of a camera tart, isn't she... and so proud of herself... lol! T.

Glad to hear that all is starting to look so much better with Kane's wound... I'm tipping the naughty beggar was doing some surrupticious scratching/rubbing to relieve the healing itch... T.

It does mention accountability, but seems to only be where budgets are concerned... however, if they end up funded by a government department, then there will be a course that one can take to make complaints and have them taken seriously... According to the committee report, in the 2018/2019 financial year, RSPCA inspectorate cost 5.8 million to run. Only around 500k of that was government funding, so no real course of action can be taken if a complaint is made... but if the government ends up funding more than 50% of that enormous figure, then they are really going to scrutinise how it is spent, and there we may have recourse when overzealous actions are employed - as such things are a bloody waste of time and money, and rarely cover the costs of doing them. Case in point: My work got done over a few years ago, and were served with 12 offence notices. Those 12 notices took some 60 days to happen, with many costs regarding animals in care, vet fees, time taken to collect all data and present to their legals before they were (apparently) checked for legal veracity, then sent to our legals. 12 months of back and forthing with said legals which racked up considerable legal fees on our end, so it could be construed that the other side racked up their fair share also. The apparent bill for "care" of the animals siezed totalled over 10k - add that to the legal personnel costs and the costs of sending 2 inspectors and a vet out to do the raid, the inspector's time to collate the data and send to their legals. 1 week before the due court date, the offer came to drop 11 charges if my employer would plead guilty to just 1 - the fine for that guilty plea was around 20k, of which RSPCA received a moeity (supposed to be half the fine). So the financial return was anywhere between 10k and 20k (depends on how much of the fines they actually pocket). 10k wouldn't even have covered the cost of "caring" for the animals they siezed... so are their tactics financially viable? If they become more fully funded by government, there will be the need to account for all monies spent... and that gives us poor bastards a way to hit them where it hurts. T.

There are strict welfare/husbandry standards set out for virtually every type of animal you can think of LG... however, even if you are complying with same (or even above), RSPCA can "form an opinion" that an animal isn't getting something it needs and sieze it. POCTAA, EAPA, etc are just ambiguous enough in their wording to allow for a fair bit of overzealous interpretation also... At my work, it's part of my job to regularly check the various welfare standards for each type of animal we have, and make sure that we are aiming well above them in how we care for our animals. Some standards are state dictated, others are federal... I pick the strictest ones available and try to do even better than what is mandated. There is a reason that we always get an A+ rating in our DPI audits. Unfortunately, the RSPCA march to the beat of their own drum in these matters, and you can never be certain what they will choose to find fault with at their own "discretion"... *sigh* T.

Rude that the 3 year signoff costs more than the 1 year.... seeing as it's the same concoction... T.

I read it as the animal libbers looking to update POCTAA to recognise sentience, impose higher penalties for animal cruelty offences, and better fund whichever parties are tasked with enforcement. However, with increased government funding also comes some form of accountability... so fingers crossed that bit is enacted. Funny how AWL say that they are aiming to be completely self funding for their inspectorate within the near future, yet RSPCA still have their hand out, but don't feel accountability is needed... *sigh*... AWL admit shortcomings of current complaint processes regarding their practices, RSPCA does not (funny that). Personally, the main thing I want to see happening is accountability... an indepentent ombudsman to deal with breaches of power/procedure/law. Currently there is absolutely no accountability short of complaining to the entity that is perpetrating the offence(s)...and it's unlikely that will get you far... grrr! T.

Scratch has the right of it with regards to the C3... however the KC component needs to be give annually. T.

"Whatcha doin' Mum?"... lol! T.

Spongy/fleshy may be part of Kane's scar formation process... I'd be worried if it was angry red, weeping, seroma build up, or dark areas indicating necrosis. Has he been leaving it alone? Not licking at it? Sometimes they get quite itchy as the scar line heals, and naughty dogs will lick it to try to resolve the itching... and that can cause redness... or he could be rubbing it against the floor/grass/carpet to resolve the itch too... I have had another look at the photo you posted, and overall it looks not too bad considering the size and depth of the wound that would have been required to do his surgery. Kudos to you for being hyper-vigilant...that will guarantee that he makes a full recovery with few real issues. T.

The Committee have published their report today... https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/inquiries/2550/Report No 1 - Select Committee on Animal Cruelty Laws in New South Wales - 04 June 2020.pdf T.

My Labrador had quite an alarming reaction to her internal stitches after being spayed...there was a fluid build up like you wouldn't believe. What we ended up doing was draining the fluid every other day until the reaction resolved itself. The first couple of drainages were a good 20ml each, but she was quite happy to have it done with no sedation, and it did resolve without any need for medications (there was no infection, just allergic response) in about a week. I would discuss with your vet that follow up consults relating to the surgical procedure Kane has had should be free, as this issue is directly related to that procedure. If he does have an allergic fluid build up reaction, simple draining of same at regular intervals should work just fine. T.

Living on the land must mean so much enrichment available for your little ones... you are truly blessed... Methinks his daddy and mummy have both donated their very best genetic traits to this little man... and he should become a fantastic worker for the Boss... and he's such a handsome fellow to boot! T.

Actually that isn't the one of choice @asal, as you are out to it before you can get the right amount into yourself... there are MANY other S8 drugs that can be used however... So sad that wonderful caring and hardworking vets (and nurses) have to leave the profession due to needing to preserve their mental health. A couple of my TAFE teachers are ex-vets... one of them (she told us) precisely for that reason. T.

We have one client at our clinic that we try to only schedule appointments when there is a male vet on shift... and if it's an emergency, we always have a second person (nurse) in the consult room to ensure against intimidation from that client. His dog is lovely, but he's a bit of an arsehole... mostly he tries for the standover and pushing for discounts, he's never been physical, but we do our best to counter that possibility. He's less likely to try intimidation on a male vet... T.

If the parents have had all the health checks to show they are sound and likely to throw sound offspring, then I'd say the price you have been quoted is reasonable. It costs money to maintain healthy breeding dogs, and even more to raise a litter of pups properly... to mitigate any foreseeable issues later down the line. T.

Is Don... is best boy! Looks like little man is going to be a god worker with those instincts... the Boss will be happy... T.

If he follows the good looks of his dad and mum, he'll be stunning methinks... and hopefully he'll also be an awesome worker too... T.

He is a truly stunning looking lad, isn't he? T.

Sounds like young Ocka is a bit of a survivor... a tough little nugget... go Ocka! T.

Oh jeebus! Those are the scariest images I've ever seen... what a brave little man he was! T.

OMG!! What acutie! Now young Ocka... there are already enough house dogs... so you are going to have to grow up to be a good worker like your mum and dad, OK? Huggles little man... dream of rounding up sheepies and goaties, OK? T.