Little Gifts

I will watch it again, The image of the dog trying to claw its way back out was very powerful for me so that is what I remember most. There was real fear there. From what I read it was TMZ who released it and of course they did it for maximum impact at the time of the movie's release. Whoever shared it with TMZ probably got paid for it too (which sucks). You are right, they should've gone straight to animal welfare the same day with their evidence, particularly if the film was still underway and more animals were still being used. Hopefully the correct authorities will investigate this and determine if any wrongdoing happened and if it is required, hopefully they will take a more stringent animal welfare approach to the filming of movies of this nature in the future.

The delay in releasing the film could be nothing to do with this issue though. They give new movies to test public audiences and will often go back and re-edit based on the feedback. They've been known to change whole endings because of this feedback and to even go back and reshoot new scenes. Given the use of animals there would need to be a lot of editing for continuity too as the dogs probably just did a couple of tasks at a time rather than a whole continuous scene. So this means you have a longer editing period after shooting has finished. They also hold over films if other films being released at a similar time by different companies might take away their box office impact or if there is some big world event happening that might distract people from hitting the cinema. It is all about money. Asal you are right that we made assumptions about what we saw but I never saw the trainer pull the dog back up - I saw the dog clawing its way back up and the trainer still giving it commands to go in and rearranging its body so it could do so. As I said in a previous post I would assume the dog was trained for this purpose but something on the day was clearly terrifying it. That's the trainer's job to manage (ie protect the dog) because the dog can't talk and call cut or for a break. Maybe it was the wind machine noise or something we are not privvy too but for that particular section of filming that dog was clearly terrified and actively avoiding getting into the water.

This confuses me a little. We are talking about a movie which is full of dogs doing a range of extreme and normal tasks - sourcing skilled trainers with suitable dogs would've been far harder than finding the human cast. Maybe this poor dog was ok with jumping into still water and it was the noise of fans and the choppy water that frightened it? I find it hard to imagine they employed a dodgy trainer and a dog not trained in this kind of work on a big budget flick. I actually blame this trainer for forcing his dog to do something it was clearly terrified about. Either it was the wrong dog for the scene or he should've told production that something wasn't right for the dog - he should've been the dog's voice. Forcing the dog to get into the water at that point was abusive. Unless the trainer stood up and said nup, it aint going to happen I can imagine the production crew would just keep the cameras rolling. I thought there were supposed to be animal welfare checks done on films like this so they could use that phrase at the end? Means that the trainer and production team all lied to an inspector on whether there had been any issues on set. Maybe that is why someone on the crew leaked the footage? Serves them all right. They've ruined a potentially beautiful movie by being negligent. It is a book I also loved but I refuse to see the film now. I don't even want to see it in 10 years time on FTA TV.

Asal, how did their lawyers even think that was ok? I'm gobsmacked!

This is off their main organisation page. I wouldn't mind seeing their KPIs on 'actively promoting care and protection'. I have never heard of them being the go to organisation in relation to farming practices either and I suspect the national events they talk of are fundraising activities rather than educational. If some states are better fundraisers than others you would also expect more programs to be offered in those states, resulting reduction in abuse/abandonment/euth/rehoming stats. Not sure I noticed anything of that nature in the last annual report but maybe I missed it? It's a grand money making business plan - we should all buy shares! What We Do The RSPCA is a community based charity that works to prevent cruelty to animals by actively promoting their care and protection. RSPCA Australia is a Federation of eight independent State and Territory RSPCA bodies called member Societies. RSPCA member Societies do much of the hands on work traditionally associated with the RSPCA such as the operation of shelters and the Inspectorate plus community education and fundraising. RSPCA Australia’s National Office is home to a strong science and campaigns team, with a particular focus on farm animal issues. RSPCA Australia is responsible for facilitating many of the national events and campaigns, and promoting the interests of animal welfare with Government and industry.

If the RSPCA was doing what people thought it was supposed to do there would be no need for all these small rescue groups - the RSPCA would already be on top of it! Instead rescue groups for every type of animal you can imagine have popped up to do the work the RSPCA wont or dont. The majority do it without millions of dollars in public and government funds. How they keep getting away with it I don't know because they are legislated to do a job they clearly aren't doing. And SG - they might be separate entities but they have the same or very similar legislated expectations otherwise they couldn't come under the RSPCA bannerhead. It's not like a franchise where anyone can decide to open up a service arm using the same name. It's their core functioning that I disagree with - Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Where is the prevention part?

Saw this on FB this morning as well as a hoarder situation in Adelaide (90 animals from a range of species inside a house). Both these situations make me so angry. Where is the RSPCA? Why do animals need to be dead and dying before they step in? Where is their prevention work? And what about council - they have a responsibility to ensure properties are safe for purpose and hygenic and to monitor animal ownership in their jurisdiction. Why do they allow these people to continue to create harmful environments and have excess numbers of animals? It's not like it happens overnight! Perhaps if they stopped with all the pissy little fines and actually stomped on these people so they had nowhere to hide things might change. If sending them to prison breaks their habit of ownership and abuse then so be it. It's also time for pet shops to accept the role they play in puppy farming and the rescue continuum. It's always the animals that suffer and as usual all the excuses are benefiting the humans.

Gretel where are you located?

I want to try Nosework with Tempeh too. And I need to start taking more regular photos of Stussy. She is 9 now and has white sunglasses to prove it. When did my baby get so old?

I love action shots of Jonah! You have done such an amazing job with him!

This is all kinds of weird for me. Some years ago I was part of a Christmas fundraising activity for AWDRI. I met the people who established it and spent half a day side by side with them. They were lovely. I continued being a financial supporter. Then I emailed them for assistance/advice. No response so I sent a second apologetic email and the response I got then was very rude. Even if they didn't remember me there was no need to type what they did. I was really sad. I've avoided them since and no longer suggest them as a rescue option to anyone looking.

Oh honey that sounds terrible! I hope things keep improving and if you need to lie down and rest then that is what you have to do. The dogs will be fine. I'm sure they can sense mummy isn't well. Thank you to IM for being such a good friend to you.

Not reincarnation as such but definately a message from the rainbow bridge - I had a rescue SBT who lived to almost 17. I could no longer foster because of the strain it would put on her. Our last foster, an SBT puppy arrived when she was about 14 years old and she took on a mother role but she still had all her faculties then. After she passed away I wanted to start fostering again but wasn't sure if the time was right and if we were all ready as she had been a major player in our household. One night she was my dream. It was a cruise ship that was sinking and she kept guiding me to safety on the different levels until we were safely back on dry land, then she just dissappeared into the crowd. I took it to say she was giving me her blessing to move forward without her. In the 16 years I'd had her and the months since she passed I had never had her in any of my dreams yet there she was that night. It helped me put to rest my concerns and we applied and got our first pei foster boy. And in another coincidence, the SBT puppy she'd nurtured turned into the most nurturing dog herself, helping the most terrified and shut down of our fosters come out of their shells and learn to trust again.

Oh dear Kirislin! I didn't know either! I second a visit from IM and Secret. I would be a good cheerer upperer. Are you getting closer to being back on top of your health?

Well I hope you keep the oldie too given the pics you and it are capable of taking together!

Were these new or old camera? You can't beat nature for raw beauty, colour, texture, movement, you name it!

Bet he said a few curse words when he realised someone had let the goats loose!

Loved the story about the Boss and the dogs!

I inherited a corgi GSD cross. No idea which breed mum was. For his entire, long life he looked like GSD puppy with a longer wheel base.

Ams used to dry chicken necks and breasts for the pei but she had some fancy looking thing that looked like a desktop filing cabinet with shelves that slid in and out. I think it was around $100 and it wasn't from Aldi's. I don't think she's on DOL anymore to comment but I remember once she mentioned problems with the necks rotting quicker than she could dry them out with the machine. It may have been related to our summer heat at that time. I know she did successfully dry a lot on a ongoing basis. I'm thinking once you dry meat though you probably don't want to use the same set up to dry fruit.

I had a customer at work who is a dog trainer who also fosters working dogs. I told her about this thread and your work because I think what you do is just so amazing! I'm sure she's been lurking through your thread!

Did you get rid of your boat that you had on the trip over? I hope you have an interesting trip - looking forward to the pics as I did a similar trip many moons ago so will be interested to see what it looks like now.

This story was just on the news. Tears.

I agree that the RSPCA should not be naming and shaming - they should be focussed on saving any at risk animals and letting the prosecution process occur. There are also 6 sides to every story and hopefully Heather gets to tell hers where it counts most, in the courts. But I also come at these cases from a position of working in statutory child protection for many years. It was not uncommon for parents to neglect or abuse a specific child. But does that mean there wasn't a risk to all the other children in that household? If there is a vulnerable party and evidence of an abuser/neglector I'd rather err on the side of caution and protect all the vulnerable. I've also experienced plenty of cases where matters were either unsubstantiated, not as bad as first considered or quickly rectified with support. Perhaps that is what is lacking in cases such as this too - a willingness to accept things are not going well and to address them so the animals can be returned? I still don't see anything reported from Heather about how she was physically capable of caring for the needs of 82 animals every day. This is my main issue with puppy farmers and back yard breeders. If you can appropriately care for animals en masse because of the set up you have and number of staff on hand every single day of the year then fine, but we see time and time again that corners are cut and it is the animals who pay the price for it. We wouldn't accept an invalided patient being confined to a bed containing their own urine and faeces. We wouldn't accept a child being fed and having to sleep in their cot surrounded by their waste either. We wouldn't accept a filthy child covered in sores and with matted hair. The reason we don't accept these things is because they are easily fixable by anyone. They don't require a special skill and they don't take a lot of time if attended to as they happen. Some of them wont even exist if you find time within even a 24 hour time period to catch up on what you couldn't do immediately. The absence of them being done is neglect. If you can't attend to basic needs because the load is too great then the onus is on you to rectify that situation. If repeated complaints about the same issue were made over a period of time then that is evidence that no self-rectification was going to come. We humans bring these animals into the world and we owe it to them to do so responsibly. All the excuses in the world mean nothing when the harm has already been caused. Companion animals die because of this stuff, particularly if they end up in the RSPCAs sticky fingers.

These two statements disturb me: "....about 30 dogs were left behind." "Her statement says there have been no adverse reports from prior inspections and no prior breaches of the Prevention to Cruelty to Animals Act." There is something wrong with our legislation when 52 animals are seized but 30 are left. If you are capable of neglecting 52 then you are capable of neglecting the other 30 under the duress of a seizure and hiding it from authorities better. Not that I want these poor animals ending up in the hands of the RSPCA but this concept of leaving the less neglected behind just makes no sense. And the second statement - well just because you haven't gotten caught before doesn't mean you haven't done anything wrong. I am with Melzawelza - if you don't have an appropriate staff to animal ratio then it is simply not possible to adequately care for that many animals on your own, with your partner or with part time helpers. Even if you only give each animal 1/2 an hour of interaction and care per day that is 41 hours bare minimum per day needed for all the companion animals on that property. Simple reality.