Nic.B Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Spot on Hardys Angel, this group will be long gone though there will be fallout for years and years to come. There has been another dog attack. This time the dog attacked two on lead dogs and bit a child. Melanie Norman picked the dog up and as usual they disapear off the face of the earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic.B Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 The other aspect of great concern re fundraising is the emotive, manipulative language used to guilt peopple to donate. When you think about it, she has an open market, I have never seen it done before. Of course the same emotive, manipulative language is also used to guilt people into taking untested dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keetamouse Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Spot on Hardys Angel, this group will be long gone though there will be fallout for years and years to come. There has been another dog attack. This time the dog attacked two on lead dogs and bit a child. Melanie Norman picked the dog up and as usual they disapear off the face of the earth. I hope the person who bought the dog from PR takes legal action against Melanie Norman, this could be one way for her to be investigated and stopped from doing what she is doing. Maree CPR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheilaheel02 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) PR is an outstanding marketing success, no doubt, but what has many of us concerned is whether it is the real deal or a 'mudguard' organization and, if the latter, whether rescue generally could be left wearing the mud in the longer term. I doubt any of us can claim a perfect record, I'm sure we've all made mistakes while finding our way in the world of rescue, especially in the early days, but hopefully we have learned, improved and adapted our behaviour. While people and organisations come and go, there is still a wealth of knowledge here on DOL and elsewhere in rescue if people wish to seek it out. There is no shortage of excellent mentors, some with decades of experience. Equally, the old way is not necessarily the best way and we should all be welcoming fresh blood and innovation. That said, if sitting on FB and incessantly requesting donations from the public, with the goal of saving as many dogs as possible and shipping them around the country sans temperament testing and quarantine was the answer, wouldn't we all be doing it? It is a heck of a lot easier than what most of us stuggle with on a daily basis in our quest to do things the 'proper' way. So why don't we? Because we care about dogs, people and our reputations and we want to make a positive difference in our community. If PR was the answer, I'd be happy to support them and just retire from rescue to focus on other things I'm passionate about in my life. In a perfect world the two camps might have a meeting of the minds where PR and rescue groups could work together and leverage each others strengths, or possibly PR could expand to include strategies and infrastructure whereby they could legitimately run what 'most' consider an ethical rescue organization. However, it seems the days for entertaining that dream have already long passed. Because most of us do not choose to follow their religion, they either see us as competition, the enemy (I am aware of some of the unwarranted vitriole levelled at others behind the scenes), or simply a resource to draw upon when they get it very wrong. I've never been entirely convinced about having an umbrella regulatory organization for rescue, but perhaps it's time for a change of heart, depending on the structure and focus of the organization. Regulations are one thing, they must be actually be policed to be effective, but key roles of such an organization would need to be public education as well as engaging and lobbying Govt. All ethical rescue would need to be on board and share the vision. If we don't work together, I fear like many others, that we will get more 'negative' Government legislation aimed at controlling the cowboys and it will make it nigh impossible for 'private' (Inc or otherwise) rescue groups to survive. S Edited for sense. Need more coffee! Edited August 17, 2012 by Sheilaheel02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mita Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 (edited) That said, if sitting on FB and incessantly requesting donations from the public..., with the goal of saving as many dogs as possible and shipping them around the country sans temperament testing and quarantine was the answer, wouldn't we all be doing it? It is a heck of a lot easier than what most of us stuggle with on a daily basis in our quest to do things the 'proper' way. So why don't we? Because we care about dogs, people and our reputations and we want to make a positive difference in our community. If PR was the answer, I'd be happy to support them and just retire from rescue to focus on other things I'm passionate about in my life. Sorry for picking out one bit of your interesting post. But I wanted to support your paragraph which contains the very foundations of rescue. Which are to be 'on the ground' and 'reality checking'. That's where the dogs and the people actually are. The Net is brilliant for helping things 'happen'... and our world is so much better for it. But, sometimes it skips over the real world where things actually happen... and have consequences. Pet Rescue, for example, works well on the Net because it's a focal point where the public can reach the 'real world' work of pet rescue, its organisational structures and what it offers. There are such strict aspects of that rescue organisation, like temperament assessment, health and veterinary attention, desexing protocols, monitored fostering, & screening/trialling for new homes. All this within the parameters of state and local law (& even federal law when it comes to taxation matters). All of which is why rescue is hard, hard work for those who do it. So I can't see how it could be relegated to largely operating from cyberspace. Edited August 17, 2012 by mita Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Spot on Hardys Angel, this group will be long gone though there will be fallout for years and years to come. There has been another dog attack. This time the dog attacked two on lead dogs and bit a child. Melanie Norman picked the dog up and as usual they disapear off the face of the earth. I hope the person who bought the dog from PR takes legal action against Melanie Norman, this could be one way for her to be investigated and stopped from doing what she is doing. Maree CPR The problem here is that the pound released said dog to the "rescue" (read PR) - PR would legally pass the buck to the council/pound for releasing the dog in the first place. What PR are offering the pounds is something that impacts favourably on their kill stats... WE all know that those unsuitable animals eventually end up in some other council area to be destroyed (in many cases interstate), but I'm not sure that the pounds that are working closely with PR are seeing that far down the track - it's only THEIR OWN stats that they are focusing on - and until someone higher up the food chain makes a complaint, I don't see things changing very much in the near future. Maybe the DLG might be interested in checking up on PR's activities - there will be a huge number of animals that have been released under PR's 16D - can PR authenticate exactly where all of those dogs have been sent? All the DLG need to do is an audit of PR's 16D releases... T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 I've never been entirely convinced about having an umbrella regulatory organization for rescue, but perhaps it's time for a change of heart, depending on the structure and focus of the organization. Regulations are one thing, they must be actually be policed to be effective, but key roles of such an organization would need to be public education as well as engaging and lobbying Govt. All ethical rescue would need to be on board and share the vision. If we don't work together, I fear like many others, that we will get more 'negative' Government legislation aimed at controlling the cowboys and it will make it nigh impossible for 'private' (Inc or otherwise) rescue groups to survive. I've been of the opinion for a while now that perhaps rescue does need regulation. For example, there's a group down here (we'll omit the name for the time being) who are doing some very unethical things- things that will have an impact on what I do. I'd rather not have more paperwork to deal with but if it protects the reputation of my breed and rescue in general, sure, I'll cope with it- because at the end of the day, the dogs benefit. With groups like PR, I don't see anything changing. You can only educate those who are willing to listen and learn. When education fails and legally, they aren't really doing anything wrong (because blame can always be passed elsewhere), the options for dealing with the issue become very limited. If I was a rescuer up in NSW, I'd be pushing for a rescue org like DRAV and from there, lobbying for legislation of the industry. It's sad that it has to come to that but clearly, it's now needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic.B Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 I agree the time has come for basic standards and policy to be put in place. At the very least a consumer or even a shelter can pick reputable groups from the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gapvic Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 The greyhound I asked about in the first post has gone to a home in Victoria with a cat. I did wonder if he had been tested prior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Theoretically, every time a pound releases an animal to anyone, the liability for it if it causes carnage is theirs. PR are banking on this fact - especially if they are sending new owners directly to the pound to pick up the animal they are purchasing through PR. Nice little money spinner for PR by the way - in most cases they are getting the animal from the pound for little money or nothing in some cases, then charging new owners for it and having said new owners pick up straight from the pound. As for the animals being sent interstate - where is the backup for new owners or "foster carers" when said animal is not desexed, and they can't get PR to follow through on that either? From what I can see, all PR do when contacted about issues with a rehomed (or "fostered") dog is give the contact details of some other rescue groups to ask for assistance. That - or they delete any references from their Facebook pages and pretend everything is all sweetness and light. Seriously, the only way I can see PR being slowed down at all is for one of the pounds they source dogs from to be sued by a disgruntled recipient of an unsuitable animal. That would make the pound a lot less inclined to work with PR due to possible "splash back" when the poo hits the fan. Unfortunately it may also have the effect of said pound stopping it's association with ALL rescue. Once bitten and all that... *sigh* Regulation of rescue isn't going to solve the issue either - there's virtually no policing of current laws and statutes, so adding new laws and statutes would really be pointless IMHO. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 They have a licence to fundraise, the point being there is no accountability that the funds raised for x dog go to x dog, I had a licence to fundraise prior to being granted DGR- they will be accountable and have guidelines - so report them to the issues of the licence. If they are raising funds for specific dogs that are already with other rescues or not saved then it is fraud and they need to be reported to the Police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 I agree the time has come for basic standards and policy to be put in place. At the very least a consumer or even a shelter can pick reputable groups from the rest. Maybe not Nic... think PIAA and their "accredited" pet shops, kennels, etc... Policy looks great on paper only... T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 For a private adopter their fee is $150, but they will give the dogs to rescue for free. How do they do desexing and vaccination, worming etc for $150? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic.B Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 PR is an outstanding marketing success, no doubt, but what has many of us concerned is whether it is the real deal or a 'mudguard' organization and, if the latter, whether rescue generally could be left wearing the mud in the longer term. I doubt any of us can claim a perfect record, I'm sure we've all made mistakes while finding our way in the world of rescue, especially in the early days, but hopefully we have learned, improved and adapted our behaviour. While people and organisations come and go, there is still a wealth of knowledge here on DOL and elsewhere in rescue if people wish to seek it out. There is no shortage of excellent mentors, some with decades of experience. Equally, the old way is not necessarily the best way and we should all be welcoming fresh blood and innovation. That said, if sitting on FB and incessantly requesting donations from the public, with the goal of saving as many dogs as possible and shipping them around the country sans temperament testing and quarantine was the answer, wouldn't we all be doing it? It is a heck of a lot easier than what most of us stuggle with on a daily basis in our quest to do things the 'proper' way. So why don't we? Because we care about dogs, people and our reputations and we want to make a positive difference in our community. If PR was the answer, I'd be happy to support them and just retire from rescue to focus on other things I'm passionate about in my life. In a perfect world the two camps might have a meeting of the minds where PR and rescue groups could work together and leverage each others strengths, or possibly PR could expand to include strategies and infrastructure whereby they could legitimately run what 'most' consider an ethical rescue organization. However, it seems the days for entertaining that dream have already long passed. Because most of us do not choose to follow their religion, they either see us as competition, the enemy (I am aware of some of the unwarranted vitriole levelled at others behind the scenes), or simply a resource to draw upon when they get it very wrong. I've never been entirely convinced about having an umbrella regulatory organization for rescue, but perhaps it's time for a change of heart, depending on the structure and focus of the organization. Regulations are one thing, they must be actually be policed to be effective, but key roles of such an organization would need to be public education as well as engaging and lobbying Govt. All ethical rescue would need to be on board and share the vision. If we don't work together, I fear like many others, that we will get more 'negative' Government legislation aimed at controlling the cowboys and it will make it nigh impossible for 'private' (Inc or otherwise) rescue groups to survive. S Edited for sense. Need more coffee! Beautiful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 (edited) I agree the time has come for basic standards and policy to be put in place. At the very least a consumer or even a shelter can pick reputable groups from the rest. Maybe not Nic... think PIAA and their "accredited" pet shops, kennels, etc... Policy looks great on paper only... T. If ethical rescues are directly involved in the drafting process, the results would be very different, I'd imagine. Comparing a group representing rescue and a group representing an unethical means of selling animals is like comparing apples and oranges- one is already working only in the interests of profit whereas the other is working with welfare in mind. Being accredited really shouldn't be as simple as paying a yearly membership fee. Most rescues are pretty transparent on the policies and if you know a group's policies and whether or not they conform to the accepted standard, selecting members really isn't that hard. Edited for typos Edited August 17, 2012 by Hardy's Angel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 For a private adopter their fee is $150, but they will give the dogs to rescue for free. How do they do desexing and vaccination, worming etc for $150? I'd be theorising that maybe it isn't done at all in many cases... T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic.B Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 For a private adopter their fee is $150, but they will give the dogs to rescue for free. How do they do desexing and vaccination, worming etc for $150? I'd be theorising that maybe it isn't done at all in many cases... T. From HP a C5 top up (from C3) if they are lucky and a desex. Regardless it is done with donations from the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Does HP desex before release? Or does rescue get them undesexed and the onus is on them to desex? Just wondering about the animals whisked off interstate so rapidly - are they desexed first by PR or not? T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheilaheel02 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Are we certain that the pound or shelter would bear all the legal responsibility for releasing a potentially unsuitable dog? The shelter staff are not employed as behavioural experts and generally they share what they have observed of a particular animal, as a courtesy only, whilst it was in their care for a relatively short period. I have never seen it presented in a format that gives the impression it is a 100% accurate assessment of an individual. I'd be very surprised if the Government don't have a disclaimer somewhere to limit their liability, perceived or otherwise. Information rescuers provide after temperament testing and time spent in foster care is still essentially a reasonable guide only. If a dog is adopted directly from the pound, then I imagine liability would need to be established between the seller and the purchaser. However, if the dog is released via a Clause and is chipped into the name of the rescue and is then passed/sold on to a third party does full liability still fall back on the pound/shelter with no responsibility attributed to the organisation in the middle? Can anyone clarify from a legal standpoint? Just trying to get my head around it. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Does HP desex before release? Or does rescue get them undesexed and the onus is on them to desex? Just wondering about the animals whisked off interstate so rapidly - are they desexed first by PR or not? T. HP does not currently desex before release. As transport goes from that area I doubt that the dogs go via a vet first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now