stellnme

Exactly. These are forms of killing a dog which would bring charges and convictions in any other field of animal welfare - why would they think it humane to use blunt force trauma (bludgeoning) to euthanize. Not saying that everyone would use this method but it sure leaves the way open to do so.

Quite a few points that need to be changed in my opinion. The worst one for me is that any method of euthanasia is deemed okay as long as it is humane - but they fail to define humane, which can be interpreted as shooting or blunt force trauma, or whatever they want to do really. Who will know what they do. I agree Mita, euthanasia should be done by a vet by injection. How can one person look after 100 dogs at a time, and this includes those whelping who can be left alone overnight according to this. I seriously wonder what people were thinking when the code was drafted.

I'd like to see a "hand in an idiot" scheme - and get an intelligent person in return. Who decides which dogs in pounds will be "safe", are they then guaranteed never to do harm to anyone? There are certainly enough rules and regulations already, just need them enforced.

Apparently the 24 year old was a cousin. This is the worst nightmare and as a mother and grandmother, I can not imagine anything more horrifying than trying to stop a dog attacking a small child. No matter what the background story is, things happen in life and this is one of the most tragic things that can happen.

Shelby, what a very sad day for you. I hope your happy memories of both of them will, in time, bring you comfort.

So close to her good home, what a tragic thing to happen. So sorry, Perry's Mum.

Well done, Renae! That's what all the extra special looking after by your mum has done. Hoping for many more birthdays.

Sleep well, Bernie. What a dear old soul.

Just updating that I had a very productive and polite meeting with the council rep. and was quite pleased with the outcome and information gained. The $70 was reported wrongly and is actually $50. The $133 was $50 surrender fee plus 7 day's upkeep. Council will be flexible with surrender fees and their priority will always be to rehome first, not to automatically euthanize. As suspected, cost is always a factor and the cost to house animals with no surrender fee was becoming unmanageable. They are hoping that it will hopefully make people think twice about their responsibilities. I still would have preferred one fee as the two are confusing but apparently the object to rehome where possible is the same with both. As there are groups that work with the pound and the facebook page has had great success, they don't intend to just euthanize if there are options they can try first. While I had the opportunity, I took along figures on how some of the other pounds rehome and pointed out that it can be done with local vets on board to provide a permanent cheap rate of desexing and vet work, then educate the people adopting that they are taking home a healthy animal with all (or most) vet work done for the price. I know this won't happen overnight but at least it has been put out there to a receptive and interested audience. Nothing is perfect but at least I have brought it to their attention that things can be done to improve the situation, and established that their intentions are to rehome as many as possible.

I would say that we can never have too many reminders about parvo and infection control.

No flaming from me, I quite agree an animal is for life. I think the main points here are that there are two fees and that they were set with no consultation with the rescue groups who do take the animals from the pound to rehome when they can, and that these fees will negatively impact on their small resources. If anyone has the actual dollar amount of the surrender fee from their local pound, please send it on. And I'm assuming none of that "extra" money the pound gets for rehoming a dog gets passed to the rescue group who does the actual rehoming? I would very much doubt it.

No, it's separate from the reclaim issue. They would recoup their money if/when people reclaim their animals. I don't think any dog would eat $18/19 worth of food a day, especially when they don't serve the top food in pounds. I really understand that all councils have to watch the money but a flat surrender fee as others here have suggested sounds a fairer way to go to me. The pound I am talking about tries to rehome but when an animal is surrendered, it can PTS very soon after. With the new fees, I fear that the animals won't get that rehome option if the owner chooses the euthanasia fee.

No flaming from me, I quite agree an animal is for life. I think the main points here are that there are two fees and that they were set with no consultation with the rescue groups who do take the animals from the pound to rehome when they can, and that these fees will negatively impact on their small resources. If anyone has the actual dollar amount of the surrender fee from their local pound, please send it on.

I'm putting together a submission for the council and need information on what other pounds charge, etc. Will then try to arrange a meeting with the Environment head and Ranger. I suspect strongly that it is a cost exercise and is already done and dusted, but no harm in alerting them to alternative measures. Also putting together what the bigger pounds do in regard to desexing and all vet work before the animal leaves the pound, so anyone who knows how Blacktown pound/council was finally persuaded to change their system, please let me know. Lots of experience with putting these together, so definitely will not be overly emotional. Thanks, Anne, for your advice.

They have to run the pound somehow. Where I used to work it was around $20. That doesn't cover a skerrick of the cost of rehoming an animal. They don't desex prior to rehoming at this pound - they only get a microchip if not already implanted. The rescue groups do all the vet work when they take an animal and then rehome though.

The pound in my locality has just introduced a surrender fee which is causing quite a bit of drama amongst the cities residents. Actually, there are two - $70 if you want to surrender an animal for euthanasia and $133 if you want the pound to try to rehome. The dismal thought is that people will choose the cheaper option, tie a lot of dogs to the pound's gate after hours, or there will be a lot of people "finding" an animal and bringing it to the pound, as there is no charge for that. Of course, microchipping isn't done as it should be to enable people to do that. Can any rescuers or those in the know who regularly visit pounds, please let me know if there is a fee to surrender in your city/town and what it is? I might mention that this pound has several groups who work with it very well to rehome. One group takes a lot of surrenders before they end up in the pound and are now worried that they will be inundated by those looking for a cheaper option, and rightly so. Apart from this, the pound has come along in leaps and bounds, putting all the animals on their facebook page and working with rescue. Any information would be helpful!

A nightmare for the owners of both dogs, but they lose me when they ask for money, in this case, $25,000. Nothing would bring back your precious dog, and how can getting money help at all? I would like to see that the kennel owners were fined (which they were from BCC) and lift their game so that nothing like this could ever happen again to any animal. Offering the price of a replacement dog should happen, however "insulting" the owners think that is, but $25,000?

They certainly do live in our hearts forever.....Hugs, Rach.

Also thinking of Mac and you, Westiemum. Hoping for the best.

Really good advice.

ktn, Marlie was my dog who had the elevated liver enzyme levels and yes, she was diagnosed with cushings. She was due to have an ultrasound to determine where we went from there but unfortunately went downhill and passed away. She was a very old dog with an unknown past and lots of medical problems, so the finding of elevated levels is not necessarily untreatable in other dogs as Jules has demonstrated with her Renae. I was also worried how she would cope with all the tests as she also was almost blind and hated being away from us, so in her case, it was probably kinder for her that she didn't have to go through it all. There is some good information from other people who have had experience with this in this thread and others, and Sheridan was a big help with her experiences with her Grumpy, perhaps she may come in here with some information or PM her? Best of luck as you go through this - find as much information as you can and ask many, many questions of your vet.

It's the Lost Dog's Home's Graeme Smith who says if it looks like a pitbull, it must be a pitbull. Great logic there...

Congrats to the winners! Also to the many awesome nominees - it must have been a hard job to choose out of all those deserving people.

Sleep well, Bob. The photos are a beautiful memory for you.

Social media and the degree of hate that can be generated by anonymous people behind a keyboard plays a big part in many aspects. I don't know anything about this or other cases but there are always two sides to a story. My point is that once facebook/twitter/whatever people come on board with vindictive and unproven comments, it can ruin people's lives and drive them to suicide. Surely the police should have acted to stop the harassment, and it does sound like the poor man should have had access to support for his obvious depression and possibly mental issues. So sad all around.