The Spotted Devil Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 I am sure they are going to make it, like everything else there, "state of the art". Obviously they just have a different state they think is state of the art Methinks a different state of mind..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Hmmm, maybe he is setting the scene to jump ship :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Methinks that MA is more for his own sympathy vote than Moorook's... One reaps what one sows - and when it comes back at you, it ain't pleasant, is it? T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) Does this guy think, after these antics, that he has any kind of political career? Abusive of an agency enforcing SA law, prone to whipping up hysteria and clearly incapable of considering both sides of an issue. How he'd think that anyone other than the lunatic fringe 'save em all' brigade would vote for him is a complete mystery. Certainly not how I'd advise anyone to run a political campaign. If he'd poured the same efforts into raising funds properly (there's one epic fail), meetings to negotiate a way to fix issues and finding volunteers just imagine how much better things could have been. I wouldn't vote for him for garbage collector. Edited May 17, 2013 by Haredown Whippets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pjrt Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Does this guy think, after these antics, that he has any kind of political career? Abusive of an agency enforcing SA law, prone to whipping up hysteria and clearly incapable of considering both sides of an issue. How he'd think that anyone other than the lunatic fringe 'save em all' brigade would vote for him is a complete mystery. Certainly not how I'd advise anyone to run a political campaign. If he'd poured the same efforts into raising funds properly (there's one epic fail), meetings to negotiate a way to fix issues and finding volunteers just imagine how much better things could have been. I wouldn't vote for him for garbage collector. Although his credentials seem to fit that job description perfectly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weasels Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Well the niche of anti-flouride conspiracy theorist has already been filled in SA parliament, so MA had to add another bow to his quiver to set him apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 He probably got done for no license if he can't rescue any more, they won't let you unless you have the correct permits. What a fool, why would you open yourself up to this is you hadn't done what you should have done in regards to paperwork. I am just guessing though from his comments. Protecting from the rspca comments might be a smokescreen to cover for the fact he just couldn't bother or couldn't get permits. Good luck getting then now :laugh: $200,000, I think we know that that is a Mark fact, i.e. pulled out of his bottom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casowner Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Willow wood has natives, natives which EVERY animal would need to be on permit or have a rescue permit. He has posted photo's of animals requiring "treatment" on the WW page so my guess is someone questioned his permit status dunno but that is all I can think of. RSPCA would only intervene if NP&WS asked them too but who knows what really happens in his world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Just a dumb question here... if Lola runs the rescue 24/7, then what's her income source if she's not shifting extremely high volumes of dogs? If she has managed to spend anywhere near $200,000 on the place, then wouldn't the tax department be interested in where the money is coming from, and wanting their cut of it? T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Well for what its worth - I think Lola was trying to do the right thing by the dogs. It would appear there was a lot wrong and pretty obvious that something needed to be done. But I think that Lola has been punched enough and is likely to punched officially,publicly more yet. In all honesty I dont care if they have been asking for donations without licences to do so and I dont care about what her income stream has been . The consequences for her and the dogs and all rescue especially in that state are already going to be far reaching. Its not going to help any dogs for her to be raked over the coals about the nitty gritty of how the place was managed - the focus needs to be on how it will function to be able to ensure dogs are able to be in the best circumstances possible and what help is needed to achieve that. im not up for kicking hell out of old ladies when they are down and that will be the result if we loose focus on whats best for the dogs and start looking at how she should be punished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Personally I'd be happy with less punishment if it stopped her from rescuing any more. She works so she doesn't have the time to look after the animals the way they should be. The other major thing is she really is indifferent to disease and suffering. I know it's really hard to understand or believe that someone who is supposed to save dogs really doesn't give a shit, but she doesn't. I know some think her heart is in the right place but it's not. She really needs to be stopped from rescue altogether. She has already said she won't refuse to take in animals so it would quickly go back up again. I think once the rspca case is outlined in court anyone that had lingering doubts about this "poor old woman" will realise what a horror she really is. People didn't help at Moorook to support her, they did it to try to make the animals more comfortable there. Even when this woman knew she couldn't cope and the animals were suffering there she refused to let anyone help to make their life better. Some of her most vocal supporters and a volunteer there have told me in person previously how bad it is and they don't have a nice thing to say abut her. They only help now because Mark has brainwashed them into thinking all rescue will go down and the dogs and cats there will all be PTS. Don't fall into the trap of thinking adding the word rescue in somehow mitigates how neglectful a person can be, it's no excuse. We don't tolerate it from puppy farmers and give them any leeway and the conditions are similar down to having dogs breeding on the premises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Now the key volunteers have quit and been fired it is really back to just her again, a woman who doesn't care and gates that only the police and the rspca can get through. Thank Dog the trial isn't far away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Well for what its worth - I think Lola was trying to do the right thing by the dogs. It would appear there was a lot wrong and pretty obvious that something needed to be done. But I think that Lola has been punched enough and is likely to punched officially,publicly more yet. In all honesty I dont care if they have been asking for donations without licences to do so and I dont care about what her income stream has been . The consequences for her and the dogs and all rescue especially in that state are already going to be far reaching. Its not going to help any dogs for her to be raked over the coals about the nitty gritty of how the place was managed - the focus needs to be on how it will function to be able to ensure dogs are able to be in the best circumstances possible and what help is needed to achieve that. im not up for kicking hell out of old ladies when they are down and that will be the result if we loose focus on whats best for the dogs and start looking at how she should be punished. OK Steve... If Lola's place was the local pound, would you still feel the same way? Seeing as it seems that it has been running like one with accepting strays dumped on them by the local council, etc If Lola works for a living and her rescue operation is a sideline, then she really should look at the numbers carefully, if only to be able to keep them clean, fed, and watered on a daily basis. One can't rely solely on volunteers to run your sideline business and keep increasing their workload to impossible levels - volunteers are a fickle bunch by nature, and can't necessarily be relied on to front up with regularity and slave their guts out for a lost cause... On a side note, I wonder how many of her FB supporters have ever seen a working kennel operation, or have even the faintest idea of how much hard work is involved in providing the animals with everything they need to thrive and become fully adoptable? With the numbers of animals Lola has, it's just not feasible for it to be run in conjunction with a full time paying job. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Well for what its worth - I think Lola was trying to do the right thing by the dogs. It would appear there was a lot wrong and pretty obvious that something needed to be done. But I think that Lola has been punched enough and is likely to punched officially,publicly more yet. In all honesty I dont care if they have been asking for donations without licences to do so and I dont care about what her income stream has been . The consequences for her and the dogs and all rescue especially in that state are already going to be far reaching. Its not going to help any dogs for her to be raked over the coals about the nitty gritty of how the place was managed - the focus needs to be on how it will function to be able to ensure dogs are able to be in the best circumstances possible and what help is needed to achieve that. im not up for kicking hell out of old ladies when they are down and that will be the result if we loose focus on whats best for the dogs and start looking at how she should be punished. OK Steve... If Lola's place was the local pound, would you still feel the same way? Seeing as it seems that it has been running like one with accepting strays dumped on them by the local council, etc If Lola works for a living and her rescue operation is a sideline, then she really should look at the numbers carefully, if only to be able to keep them clean, fed, and watered on a daily basis. One can't rely solely on volunteers to run your sideline business and keep increasing their workload to impossible levels - volunteers are a fickle bunch by nature, and can't necessarily be relied on to front up with regularity and slave their guts out for a lost cause... On a side note, I wonder how many of her FB supporters have ever seen a working kennel operation, or have even the faintest idea of how much hard work is involved in providing the animals with everything they need to thrive and become fully adoptable? With the numbers of animals Lola has, it's just not feasible for it to be run in conjunction with a full time paying job. T. To be honest I dont know how I would feel if it were a pound and Im not defending them in what they have done nor am I saying they should keep operating and clearly they cant unless they do something radical to ensure the dogs dont suffer whilst being saved. Im simply feeling that she is down and in a pretty dark place whether she admits that she has mucked it up or not, her life as she knew it will never be the same and the wheels are already in motion to ensure she isnt able to continue on . Call me soft but I just think she has been flogged enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 She hasn't gotten anything other than the rspca charges, Mark is the one who goes online and is facing the flack. Her only punishment is the pending court case, which is the result of her own actions. She'll be fine, if she actually valued what she did she wouldn't be facing some serious cruelty charges right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 I suppose the thing that worries me the most is the complete inability to realise that how she is doing things is not perfect, and will not result in the very best outcomes for the animals she has in care. Whipping up the Facebook Warriors and enlisting the help of MA, whose motives appear to be more about his own publicity than Lola's situation, is a big worry - and will inevitably be her undoing. Once this cause is lost, MA will drop her like a hot potato and move on to his next publicity seeking stunt... Just note how he's now turning all of this around to his own issues of non-compliance with the law... now all his rantings are focused on HIS issues, not Moorook's... If Lola and her supporters had only worked WITH the powers that be, then things may have had a vastly different outcome, with a lot less fuss and trouble. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 I suppose the thing that worries me the most is the complete inability to realise that how she is doing things is not perfect, and will not result in the very best outcomes for the animals she has in care. Whipping up the Facebook Warriors and enlisting the help of MA, whose motives appear to be more about his own publicity than Lola's situation, is a big worry - and will inevitably be her undoing. Once this cause is lost, MA will drop her like a hot potato and move on to his next publicity seeking stunt... Just note how he's now turning all of this around to his own issues of non-compliance with the law... now all his rantings are focused on HIS issues, not Moorook's... If Lola and her supporters had only worked WITH the powers that be, then things may have had a vastly different outcome, with a lot less fuss and trouble. T. Agreed but there is also a valid case for being able to stand up for yourself and yell about what you feel to be un just too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Agreed but there is also a valid case for being able to stand up for yourself and yell about what you feel to be un just too. I'm in agreeance with this - but you really need to pick your battles better if you aren't already compliant with the laws in place. Calling yourself rescue is not an opt out for failing to maintain the best standards for the animals in your care - and I don't give a rats that your motives are good and decent - if you are failing the animals, you need a kick up the arse in the worst possible way! T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honeybun Posted May 19, 2013 Share Posted May 19, 2013 (edited) It is a hard lesson to learn .......to say NO, and live within your means [or the rescue's means]. Also, that you can't save them all, sad as it may be, it is true. To ignore both points means, the animals you have suffer, and ultimately you yourself suffer when it all comes tumbling down. Edited May 19, 2013 by honeybun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted May 19, 2013 Share Posted May 19, 2013 There is a way to yell that is effective and there is a way to yell that gets every area of your life scrutinised and you neutralised. It's not that he is speaking out, it's that it's only for his benefit and that he is doing it so inappropriately. I've never seen more inappropriate behaviour from someone who wanted to gain public office. 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