Plan B

*head-desk* Still missing my point. What difference is there between your video and the American ones? Nada, right? You mentioned a lack of adoption videos made in Australia but if there's no difference between one and the other.. do you understand what I'm saying?

Anyways, good luck with it.

Yeah - thought I'd covered that by explaining further:

we'll eventually be taking our camera around communities and getting people involved in them (and lots of different voiceovers with lots of different accents), and one of the things we wanted to do was link back to local pounds/groups around those specific areas. So the 'documentary series' is very Australian in that sense.

We didn't say we were out to make something uniquely Australian, which is what I think you're struggling with. We only said that there weren't a lot of fun - or funny - adoption videos from Australia; the best ones tend to originate from other countries. So here's a series that originates from Australia, yet can be accessible to people beyond this country, that maybe puts adoption in a very positive light and inspires people to not just adopt but maybe get rolling with their own promotions (because big productions are awesome for that polished look but homemade has its charms too).

I think you're missing the point of my comment- there was nothing about it that identified it as being Australian (if anything, I'd have guessed American, obviously). It's a cute video but.. It doesn't mention Australia, no aspect of it suggests any differences, it might as well be American.

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure why you'd ask for peoples' thoughts if you don't actually seem to want them. If you just want positive feedback, perhaps make that clear so that people don't waste their time replying?

Also, please check your quoting.

Oh, I didn't miss the point of your comment, I just wanted to point out that the videos aren't really about promoting the country Australia, but promoting adoptions. We're in Australia and we'll eventually be taking our camera around communities and getting people involved in them (and lots of different voiceovers with lots of different accents), and one of the things we wanted to do was link back to local pounds/groups around those specific areas. So the 'documentary series' is very Australian in that sense.

These videos are just the first two, purely designed to bring a bit of fun in. Probably should've been clearer on that - just didn't expect people to get so hung-up on a voiceover. :laugh:

And going off what you'd said previously, your video with your pet would have a Russian voiceover. So we can have the best of all worlds and the production can still be Australian.

Can't you use the voices of the people who adopted the dogs you have in the video's? That would be cool! :D

They're my dogs so, we did. ;)

This. Maybe it's just me but I have a voice for each of my dogs, based on how I imagine they'd sound. For example, the Shitty Whippet sounds like a Russian Bond villian

To be honest, I guess I just don't see the point of doing Australian rescue stuff when it sounds American? No part of the video suggested anything Australian to me.

It's made in Australia, by an Australian advocacy group. I'm not Australian but I think that's also missing the point entirely. :)

I'd be happy to help with voice overs if you need anyone. I always end up doing the recordings on the phones at work that no one else will do etc :laugh:

Also my brother does some commercial voice work. I'm sure he's help for free :)

Thanks for the feedback, guys, and I will definitely be calling on anyone who wants to do some voiceovers! :D

Thanks heaps, guys. Working on a few more (and blackmailing a few people to do some voiceovers) and brainstorming some interviews.

Appreciate the feedback and ideas. :D

Also surprised there needed to be a study on this but glad there was.

I was a smoker of 14 years before I quit at the beginning of this year. Though, I never smoked inside (ever been in a smoker's house? God, it's awful) or around my pets or non-smokers. I was always the guy standing outside a pub having a cigarette before the laws even changed.

It baffles me how people can smoke around non-smokers, kids, and pets. I'm not for banning smoking but I'm totally for keeping bad habits to yourself and not inflicting them on others.

It's not intentional! I don't do voiceover work professionally, maybe I should have added. :laugh:

Okay so, maybe mockumentary is the word.

This is the first in a series of videos I'm doing for Team Dog, in the hopes of highlighting how fun and positive adoption is - as there seemed to be a real lack of adoption videos out there in Australia. Obviously we have a budget of exactly $0 so we're not going to be winning any awards but would love to know your thoughts.

The second one is here (not yet uploaded to Youtube): Why Do You Think Your Family Adopted You?

That's the response I expected.

Then please do everyone a favour and don't ask again if you're just going to be dismissive of the response. It's uncalled for and just plain petty.

Darren I've known you to be just as vehemently 'judgemental'. Adoption fees, the use of breed names, fundraising and marketing etc etc.

I don't really understand this.

You have the right to an opinion just like everybody else. But literally everyone thinks they are ethical anyway so yes, you'll get judgement everywhere. It's in the eye of the beholder apparently.

Not everyone thinks that old dogs are worth the trouble but in my opinion they are. That's rescue.

Judging foster carers and bemoaning them for saving lives is in the eye of the beholder? Come on.

There's a difference between having an opinion and using that opinion to pretty much bully people because they're not someone's idea of "ethical." I'm not saying that is happening right here in this thread but that absolutely happens in the 'rescue world.' A lot.

What would you suggest to the rescuer who left behind a rather plain bullbreed/bullarab type female and took her babies, they used the same reasons carer/room/facilities/rehomeable. Mum was pts, pound was packed. Would you judge them?

No. Not so long ago I would have. I've moved beyond that though and understand that the only one responsible for the death of that mother dog is the pound that kills her.

People don't have to rescue at all. I don't much care what their reasons for rescuing are - only that they are rescuing and hopefully doing it well. Other than that, it's none of my business.

So much judgment in "ethical" rescue.

Save what you can, when you can.

No animal is more or less deserving of a save. It can be old, young, blind, or a purebred worth a million bucks. If it needs to be saved, and you have saved it, feel good - and don't let anyone put you down for it.

The more we judge rescues, foster carers, and adopters, the less rescues, foster carers, and adopters we'll have.

But hey, gotta be "ethical," right?

And: This Article.

The Brisbane Cify Council stated last week the owners still hadn't made any contact re payment, that's why the dog was still impounded.

The Council only said they would allow the dog to be released when the fees were at over 4.5k. Not many people have that much cash up their sleeve, but the owner had about 3k through previous fundraising efforts. Team Dog raised the rest and then Council changed their minds again and refused to release him until after the hearing despite having the funds to pay.

Luckily they've changed their minds back again, the fees have been paid

I never said that it was.

At no time should "But the dog should not have been wandering the streets" come as a reply to posts like this:

I believe they have held an innocent dog, that isn't a danger to the community, for so long now..

I believe BSL is a load of crap and we shouldn't judge a whole breed or type of dog, based on a few dogs bad behaviour (because they usually don't know any better and have ignorant owners)..

I believe the council should release the dog.. For no other reason than he isn't a danger to the community..

Because then it's like you're justifying the Council somehow, even though I'm sure you're not. But that's how rebuttals read.

oh my god I blabbed like a big baby when I watched Ruby's video this morning.

I hope they were happy tears! After making people cry with the first video I did, I really felt an obligation to make a 'happy' video.

And then about a thousand people are saying how much they're crying again! :laugh:

Thank you Ruth, I am a bit behind on new things: not being on FB. Amazing what a handful of people can make happen.

Best wishes for step 2. I hope she is back with her family soon.

Squishyface Ruby.

Isn't she gorgeous! That photos just sums it all up, for me. It was also pretty hilarious how much energy she had to get out (you can see in the video) and then about 20 minutes later, after licking the kids all over, she was chilled out in the car, waiting to go home.

Not the same. Worse. If my dogs stray and are impounded in NSW, they will not face a death sentence based on their appearance. Sadly, some dogs do.

If you have a dog at risk of BSL being imposed, you need to guard that dog's safety accordingly. You need to socialise, train, manage and contain to avoid impoundment at all costs. Puppy buyers need to understand the consequences of BSL for them and more importantly for their dogs if they are at risk of a declaration.

BSL is a crock but while it remains in force and people continue to breed and buy dogs who are at risk, then Team Dog ain't going to lack for work. Owners need to step up where they can to protect their dogs.

This is absolutely a case where an ounce of prevention is worth a ton of cure.

Totally agree with you that because of the legislation, owners of certain dogs do need to be extra careful. We're all about trying to enable owners, helping where we can, rather than doing it all for them.

Ruby's family didn't know about BSL. Ruby is their first dog and they took her on to initially just look after (although obviously fell in love and became her actual owners). They obviously know now and they'll be doing everything they can to make sure she stays at home. :)

Great result but I would point out that Ruby only came to the attention of the rangers when she was impounded for escaping her yard. A dog at large is a risk to itself and does potentially cause risk to the community.

I hope her owners are appropriately grateful to Team Dog for the work put in to securing her safety AND that they take the necessary steps to ensure she never escapes again. One escape is understandable.. any more would not be.

Mel made it clear within the Council meeting that Team Dog advocates for responsible pet ownership, which includes keeping dogs safe and secure at home. However, accidents happen, and we can all agree a dog never deserves to die because of that. If Ruby looked like any other dog, she would have been sent home with a fine. The latter is an appropriate consequence. Trying to kill a dog to teach an owner a lesson isn't.

We're working with Ruby's family to ensure she doesn't escape again. Those kind of measures are already part of our Pound Prevention program, designed to keep dogs out of the pounds and with the families that love them. Whether that be training, building fences, offering low-cost vetwork, mobility assistance, etc.

Font size increased on the last update which introduced the bulk image uploader.

I'm really okay with that trade-off because uploading each individual photo separately was a chore.

Let's do discuss the title of the thread some more, as opposed to the content.

Productive.

Plan B, your ability to actually read appears to be deteriorating. If I were you, I'd be more concerned about that then being worried about something that was never said. Masked men? Outside my widow? Really? :laugh:

Ugh. I expanded upon your rather fantastical reply. So sue me. But let's at least stay on topic. If you don't want to discuss the issue within the thread and instead want to argue semantics and how it was posted, maybe just leave it at that?

I'm not clear what the threat is (for example to me as an owner of a purebred Pug)? I'm sorry, I don't understand.

Can someone please spell it out for me really clearly? :)

Because while the Pug breed is very unlikely to be restricted or classed as "menacing," this type of legislation promotes the idea that those breeds that are restricted are unfriendly, and those that aren't are friendly. A lot of time, effort, and money goes into this proven to fail legislation and way of thinking that, ultimately, makes your community unsafe. So while these recommendations don't target your dog specifically, the side effect is that you/your dog could very well become the victim of bad, ineffective legislation.

The threat to all pet owners is there. It's an immediate threat. And, okay, just to please someone, you can sit back and finish your cup of tea before deciding to move against it, but leave it too long and more and more dogs will lose their lives - as we've seen before.

I can well understand the concerns but whipping dog owners into a frenzy with irrational and broadly based statements will not help the cause in my opinion.

Because sitting back and watching VIC go to the crapper worked so well.

And if you really thought a forum post was going to warn you about masked men right outside your window, that's a little concerning.

Shared it on our Facebook Page for you. Hope it leads to something.

Unfortunately those pretty statistics don't stop dogs being dumped, nor do they help those dogs. It just glosses over the "bad stuff" and says "but look, good stuff happens which means the bad stuff doesn't really matter".

I'm not sure that it does. I think what it does it put things into perspective, especially for animal advocates/rescuers. Too often we get swept up in the negative and don't even realise that, actually, this "irresponsible public" is by and large very responsible and caring. It's also a timely reminder to stop bashing the public, blaming anyone and everyone we can for being an "irresponsible owner," and start reaching out to the overwhelmingly good people in our communities.

I can definitely see your point of view, Koalathebear, and I respect your opinion. Everyone's entitled to recommend what they feel comfortable with and I'm not trying to argue that, just that there are ways to minimise risks without closing off avenues altogether.

And with the blanket bans, I have trouble with some of the scenarios people seem to support here. Like:

• A large dog is in a pound that has a blanket ban on adopting out large dogs to families with kids.
  
• A family with kids wants to adopt him but can't, regardless of their experience and circumstances.
  
• That dog then dies because he had no other options.
  

That just can't be acceptable? To put it down to being a sensible decision on the Pound's behalf is ludicrous to me.