anniek Posted January 4, 2013 Author Share Posted January 4, 2013 I wanna do the survey and see what I score :laugh: you don't have to - these are just for you :heart: :heart: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayla1 Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 In any other community sphere anyone wanting to set up a state or national coalition of groups would consult the stakeholders first, asking them what they wanted out of such a group and developing a collaborative vision. I am somewhat exasperated that in rescue someone decides to set up an organization, announces itself and then presumes it speaks for rescue because it exists. and asks for donations Ummm... the ABN listed for the NARGA site is "Not entitled to receive tax deductible gifts", and is listed as being in Queensland (postcode 4660 - isn't that up near Red Collar Rescue?) - yet the person who is the registrant on the websites is from Tasmania?? I'd be pretty positive that they don't have the authorisation to solicit donations... T. Not sure if it was there before, but there is a statement on the website now saying they cannot currently accept donations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plan B Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 I just did a search and they are registered to fundraise: IA40625 NATIONAL ANIMAL RESCUE GROUPS OF AUSTRALIA (NARGA) INC 4660 So at least they are accountable. It doesn't seem like they actually follow up the applications to make sure every member is doing as they say they're doing so I'm not sure I understand their system at all. I think something like this could be a great idea but with better and more extensive planning, researching, and consulting with existing groups across the country. They are, after all, going to be funding them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 (edited) As far as I know.. the organisation was (is?) based in QLD but because of QLD laws, they couldn't have a secretary who resided in Tasmania (which was Rachael) and I suggested they look into incorporating in a state with less restrictive laws for their committee. They may have done that but I'm not sure. They're definitely not related to greylvr in any way and as I understand, they were looking to create something similar to DRAV in Victoria- which (if they can make it work) would be a really good thing for rescue. Edited to add.. I'm not entirely up-to-date with the politics and current ins/outs of mainland groups so when I first looked at the site, there was nothing there that concerned me. Although obviously a group must be able to verify members for the heart system so perhaps that needs to be suggested to them? As far as the heart ratings.. from what I can recall of the questions, it was things relating to welfare (five Fs, etc) and euth policies (under what circumstances are animals in care PTS, etc). I think it might be worth suggesting a system where adopters can rate their experience to help ensure both sides of the adoption story are being told. Edited January 4, 2013 by Hardy's Angel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Gifts Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 "NARGA's goal is to provide a back up service to all animal rescue groups; to give them support and to nurture their growth and effectiveness. We will be the ultimate "one-stop-shop" for information, guidance, resources and referrals. We will be their "go-to" organisation for assistance and support." But who are they? What is their knowledge base/background? When I hit the contact page nothing comes up. Great idea but any reputable rescue would want to know who was the backbone of it if this organisation was going to lobby and represent them. Plus the issues are different in each state so I'd want to see quality reps from each state part of the organisation. The wrong kind of 'advocates' can just make things worse. From their guestbook though "Name: Hanson Comment: Just posting so the crazy stalker bitches on the Dolf forums have something to talk about to distract them from their pathetic lives. :)" Now how is that helpful or going to assist the site to look more legitimate? Bitch slapping before things have even started? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebelsquest Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 From their guestbook though "Name: Hanson Comment: Just posting so the crazy stalker bitches on the Dolf forums have something to talk about to distract them from their pathetic lives. :)" Now how is that helpful or going to assist the site to look more legitimate? Bitch slapping before things have even started? Oh dear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 From their guestbook though "Name: Hanson Comment: Just posting so the crazy stalker bitches on the Dolf forums have something to talk about to distract them from their pathetic lives. :)"Now how is that helpful or going to assist the site to look more legitimate? Bitch slapping before things have even started? Oh dear funny how that is the same quote that was psoted on Greylvr's facebook page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 From their guestbook though "Name: Hanson Comment: Just posting so the crazy stalker bitches on the Dolf forums have something to talk about to distract them from their pathetic lives. :)"Now how is that helpful or going to assist the site to look more legitimate? Bitch slapping before things have even started? Oh dear funny how that is the same quote that was psoted on Greylvr's facebook page. The people who run this group are not greylvr or her partner. So yes, it is a coincidence- perhaps posted by someone who has had less than positive experiences with people here (which is more than just one person and certainly not limited to dodgy types). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 "NARGA's goal is to provide a back up service to all animal rescue groups; to give them support and to nurture their growth and effectiveness. We will be the ultimate "one-stop-shop" for information, guidance, resources and referrals. We will be their "go-to" organisation for assistance and support." But who are they? What is their knowledge base/background? When I hit the contact page nothing comes up. Great idea but any reputable rescue would want to know who was the backbone of it if this organisation was going to lobby and represent them. Plus the issues are different in each state so I'd want to see quality reps from each state part of the organisation. The wrong kind of 'advocates' can just make things worse. From their guestbook though "Name: Hanson Comment: Just posting so the crazy stalker bitches on the Dolf forums have something to talk about to distract them from their pathetic lives. :)" Now how is that helpful or going to assist the site to look more legitimate? Bitch slapping before things have even started? Sounds very much like what Pound Rounds professed to be in the beginning. Not to mention that a quick google search on the registrant of the website(s) brings up all sorts of armchair activism references... I would prefer that these people DON'T speak for me or my group without any consultation thank you very much! T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 "NARGA's goal is to provide a back up service to all animal rescue groups; to give them support and to nurture their growth and effectiveness. We will be the ultimate "one-stop-shop" for information, guidance, resources and referrals. We will be their "go-to" organisation for assistance and support." But who are they? What is their knowledge base/background? When I hit the contact page nothing comes up. Great idea but any reputable rescue would want to know who was the backbone of it if this organisation was going to lobby and represent them. Plus the issues are different in each state so I'd want to see quality reps from each state part of the organisation. The wrong kind of 'advocates' can just make things worse. From their guestbook though "Name: Hanson Comment: Just posting so the crazy stalker bitches on the Dolf forums have something to talk about to distract them from their pathetic lives. :)" Now how is that helpful or going to assist the site to look more legitimate? Bitch slapping before things have even started? Sounds very much like what Pound Rounds professed to be in the beginning. Not to mention that a quick google search on the registrant of the website(s) brings up all sorts of armchair activism references... I would prefer that these people DON'T speak for me or my group without any consultation thank you very much! T. What's the bet that it is someone associated with PR - another money grabbing exercise. If it is them then it's laughable that they call the DOLF the stalkers, because the PR supporters are far worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Well - the registrant of the websites is an Animals Australia supporter - going by my google searches... which kinda raises the scepticism factor for me... As for the scoring hearts system - the questionnaire is rather comprehensive and is judged solely on THEIR decisions on "best practice" for rescuing and rehoming. There are some pretty dodgy rescues out there that would score highly on their scale, yet have proven track records of less than great success at doing the job in reality. How many stars can you score dogmad? In my opinion you should get the maximum as you have a proven and consistent track record of getting it right for your charges, but I bet the NARGA system would score you lower than their maximum if you are truthful on their questionnaire. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 "NARGA's goal is to provide a back up service to all animal rescue groups; to give them support and to nurture their growth and effectiveness. We will be the ultimate "one-stop-shop" for information, guidance, resources and referrals. We will be their "go-to" organisation for assistance and support." But who are they? What is their knowledge base/background? When I hit the contact page nothing comes up. Great idea but any reputable rescue would want to know who was the backbone of it if this organisation was going to lobby and represent them. Plus the issues are different in each state so I'd want to see quality reps from each state part of the organisation. The wrong kind of 'advocates' can just make things worse. From their guestbook though "Name: Hanson Comment: Just posting so the crazy stalker bitches on the Dolf forums have something to talk about to distract them from their pathetic lives. :)" Now how is that helpful or going to assist the site to look more legitimate? Bitch slapping before things have even started? Sounds very much like what Pound Rounds professed to be in the beginning. Not to mention that a quick google search on the registrant of the website(s) brings up all sorts of armchair activism references... I would prefer that these people DON'T speak for me or my group without any consultation thank you very much! T. What's the bet that it is someone associated with PR - another money grabbing exercise. If it is them then it's laughable that they call the DOLF the stalkers, because the PR supporters are far worse. A lot of assumptions are being made here based on absolutely no evidence. If people are serious about getting their questions/concerns answered, why not contact the group and invite them to participate in this conversation, instead of the usual bitching/assumptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 I have googled the registrant, and the results clearly show lots of activity as an AR activist, links to AA and the like... that's where I'm getting MY "assumptions" from... and I'm not totally convinced that their current rescue members are people that I'd like mine to be listed alongside either. I also suppose that what galls me the most is that these people have set themselves up to be the spokespeople for all rescue - or all rescues they deem to be acceptable under their philosophies - WITHOUT actually consulting the majority of the group they wish to speak for... T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minimax Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 I'm thinking they have consulted the groups they wish to speak for.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Then they really have no right to call themselves a "national" body, do they? The blurb on the website lends one to believe that they wish to speak and act for ALL of us... T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minimax Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Then they really have no right to call themselves a "national" body, do they? The blurb on the website lends one to believe that they wish to speak and act for ALL of us... T. Nope, they seem to be selective! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Then they really have no right to call themselves a "national" body, do they? The blurb on the website lends one to believe that they wish to speak and act for ALL of us... T. Come on T chill out a bit if its got people in states all over Australia it can call its self national or even if they didnt they could call themselves anything they want and as long as its an opt in they would be seen to be consulting those who have opted in and they therefore represent . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Then they really have no right to call themselves a "national" body, do they? The blurb on the website lends one to believe that they wish to speak and act for ALL of us... T. That is the aim for any sort of advocacy group though. If you disagree with how things are done, it'd be better to actually explain what you think needs changing (and why) to help build something that is representative of the expected standards for rescues. Threads like this don't serve any constructive purpose generally- which is a shame because a lot of people here have valuable experience and knowledge that could go a very long way towards creating something really great. If DRAV managed it, I don't see why it can't be done nationally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 You can be 100% assured that they probably wouldn't agree with my stance on the topic of reputable rescue practices... for starters, I am strongly in agreeance with euthanaisia of any dog that is not rehomable due to temperament or health issues. I'm also not a fan of the revolving door policies of a large number of smaller rescues - I prefer a dog to be in care for a lot longer than a couple of weeks (or in some cases days) before it is advertised for rehoming - and if that dog is not a candidate for rehoming, I'm not about to keep it in care forever... instead, I will do the responsible thing by easing that dog into the next life with dignity. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 You can be 100% assured that they probably wouldn't agree with my stance on the topic of reputable rescue practices... for starters, I am strongly in agreeance with euthanaisia of any dog that is not rehomable due to temperament or health issues. I'm also not a fan of the revolving door policies of a large number of smaller rescues - I prefer a dog to be in care for a lot longer than a couple of weeks (or in some cases days) before it is advertised for rehoming - and if that dog is not a candidate for rehoming, I'm not about to keep it in care forever... instead, I will do the responsible thing by easing that dog into the next life with dignity. T. I think most groups would agree with that one though, surely. 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