Vic Gov't To Investigate Ldh

[Animal House]

http://www.abc.net.a...s-home/6032796.

Print Email Facebook Twitter More

Lost Dogs' Home: Victorian Government to investigate North Melbourne animal shelter

Updated about 3 hours agoThu 22 Jan 2015, 8:56am

PHOTO: The North Melbourne Lost Dogs' Home provides pound services for 13 councils in Victoria, the Government says.(ABC News: Mark Moore )MAP: North Melbourne 3051[/url]A formal investigation into housing conditions and the euthanasia rate at the North Melbourne Lost Dogs' Home has been launched by the Victorian Government.

The move comes after social media campaigns, including a petition started on January 16, which has almost 10,000 signatures, as well as plans for a rally by animal rescue groups.

Victorian Minister for Agriculture Jaala Pulford announced the investigation on social media.

"Due to the concerns of many Victorians about animal welfare at the Lost Dogs Home I have directed officers of the department to investigate," Ms Pulford said on Facebook and Twitter.

Ms Pulford said she had been contacted by a huge number of concerned Victorians about the organisation.

"They've contacted us through social media channels, calls to the office, Facebook, Twitter, emails - it's been a great deal of contact, particularly in recent days," Mr Pulford said.

"We think there's a community concern here that needs to be responded to quickly."

Ms Pulford said the the majority of concerns were around "high euthanasia rates, issues around the identification of owner's of animals, accommodation and housing of animals, and the assessment of animals for re-homing".

It was reported this week that a widow's pet dog Fonzie was put down by the Lost Dogs' Home after the owner had called to claim it.

President of Rescued with Love Kae Norman, who organised the petition and rally, said she started raising concerns about the Lost Dogs' Home a decade ago.

"I think there's been a lot of convenience killing ... I think there's some serious issues in management, I don't think there's enough life saving techniques," Ms Norman said.

What we need is for Lost Dogs' Home to be running as a lifesaving shelter, instead of a killing shelter and that will only happen with a change of management, protocols and public awareness to open up the shelter.

Kae Norman, Rescued with Love

"I think there's a culture of killing that isn't prevalent in a lot of other animal shelters."

The Lost Dogs' Home provides pound services for 13 local councils in Victoria, Ms Pulford said.

Ms Norman said she was not calling for another provider to be found, but for a change of culture at the home.

"Melbourne has two what we call super-pounds, the RSPCA and the Lost Dogs' Home," she said.

"The Lost Dogs' Home probably has the biggest facility at the moment to handle the number of animals that come in through these councils.

"But what we need is for Lost Dogs' Home to be running as a lifesaving shelter, instead of a killing shelter and that will only happen with a change of management, protocols and public awareness to open up the shelter."

Lost Dogs' Home conducting its own review

Chair of the Lost Dogs' Home Dr Andrew Tribe said it had begun its own review into its policies and practices, and create a "more transparent... cooperative and... more compassionate approach".

"We want to continue to reduce the numbers of animals put to sleep – through increasing adoption, and continuing education and outreach programs to reduce abandoned and lost animals," Dr Tribe said in a statement.

"We are increasing our behavioural resources to further develop our animal assessment and rehabilitation.

We will keep dogs for much longer than the eight days required, we will keep dogs for as long as it takes, to re-home then if we think it is re-homeable.

Dr Andrew Tribe, North Melbourne Lost Dogs' Home

"We want to throw our doors open to those rescue groups who are best placed to help us, with plans to appoint a dedicated rescue coordinator."

Dr Tribe told 774 ABC Melbourne that the Lost Dog's Home took in more than 12,000 dogs per year in Melbourne, and had a euthanasia rate of 13 per cent.

He said the organisation had a policy of taking in any animals.

"We're not restricted, we don't restrict our intake to only animals that we think we can re-home, we believe that we have a responsibility to take in and look after any cat or dog that is brought into us, that is surrendered to us," Mr Tribe said.

He defended the organisation's of the reported handling of the widow's dog, Fonzie.

"In the case of Fonzie, where we held onto Fonzie for 10 days I think, because Fonzie was unidentified, unregistered, didn't have a tag or a microchip, so we couldn't contact the owner," he said.

"I think the owner contacted us on the ninth day - just before we were closing I think it was a Sunday - and unfortunately couldn't come in to see if we had the dog, we didn't know we have their dog because it was unidentified.

"Then by the time they did get in, the dog had been put down."

Dr Tribe said the incident was a "lesson for all of us to register and identify our dogs better".

He said the Lost Dogs' Home has a policy that any animal that is treatable or able to be re-homed will be.

"We will keep dogs for much longer than the eight days required, we will keep dogs for as long as it takes, to re-home then if we think it is re-homeable," he said.

Topics: animal-welfare, law-crime-and-justice, state-parliament, north-melbourne-3051

First posted about 3 hours agoThu 22 Jan 2015, 8:55am

Print Email Facebook Twitter MoreMore stories from Victoria

Edited January 22, 2015 by Dust_Bunny

[melzawelza]

Long overdue.

[Stressmagnet]

He sounds like he's scrambling.

[keetamouse]

That's bullshit about "if the dog is treatable" it will be rehomed, Canberra Pooch Rescue (CPR) was started to help the dogs at the LDH, back in 2006 and we saved over 50 small dogs in 6 months until the bastard shut his doors to rescue and his reason was "because I can" the dogs we got out were "rejected" by them and many had treatable flea allergies BUT were on the list to be put to sleep, one dog a Malt boy had the most appalling coat, matted to his skin, he was deemed rehomable until one of the vets decided to clip his coat while he was awake and what did the poor dog do, he snapped at the vet because he was in a lot of pain from him pulling at his coat trying to clip him, one idiot vet in my eyes, he was then deemed not rehomable, go figure.

Maree

CPR

[teekay]

Some absolutely horrific stories are coming from ex workers at that God forsaken place. I really hope the investigation is a thorough one and people are held accountable for the cruelty that has gone on there.

[Austerra]

Have to wonder if they will eventually look at RSPCA and their kill rate (won't hold my breath).

I have heaps of customers who comment how hard it is to adopt through most rescue places so they give up, so many are refusing people for stupid petty reasons (one lady couldn't take her other dog to a meet & greet because it gets terrible car sickness, so turned down, her other dog is absolutely loved and doted on), so then these people look to pet shops that sell animals as they don't know any better as to where else to go.

[Pjrt]

I don my flame suit and once again say the very first thing that comes into mynhead is why why why is there not the outrage, the energy, the investigation, into why the hell so many dogs end up in these places in the first place. While I agree the shelters should be run properly and actually be shelter to rehomeable animals, I wish wish wish that people would get up in arms at the people dumping, not claiming, abandoning, neglecting their pets in the first place. Shelters are a poor second to dogs actually staying in their homes. This is where the biggest effort needs to be made. I shake my head every time there is this kind of thread bemoaning the shortcoming of rescue/ shelter. Why is there no bemoaning the dumping of pets. Wouldn't it be nice if less pets ended up in shelters

Edited January 22, 2015 by GrufLife

[teekay]

I don my flame suit and once again say the very first thing that comes into mynhead is why why why is there not the outrage, the energy, the investigation, into why the hell so many dogs end up in these places in the first place. While I agree the shelters should be run properly and actually be shelter to rehomeable animals, I wish wish wish that people would get up in arms at the people dumping, not claiming, abandoning, neglecting their pets in the first place. Shelters are a poor second to dogs actually staying in their homes. This is where the biggest effort needs to be made. I shake my head every time there is this kind of thread bemoaning the shortcoming of rescue/ shelter. Why is there no bemoaning the dumping of pets. Wouldn't it be nice if less pets ended up in shelters

Sorry Gruflife, but if you had read a fraction of what goes on in that place you would not be wondering why people are getting so upset about it.

Obviously every one would like people to be more responsible when buying their pets and look after them for life but that is not what this is about. This is about people who are entrusted to 'look after' the animals in the care, doing the exact opposite. This is about the animals. They may have had the misfortune of having crappy owners but they do not deserve what happens to them in there.

[Dame Aussie]

Gruflife no need for a flame suit. You're right, we need to look at why we need shelters in the first place along with how they're run. No comment re LDH at this stage.

[tdierikx]

I don my flame suit and once again say the very first thing that comes into mynhead is why why why is there not the outrage, the energy, the investigation, into why the hell so many dogs end up in these places in the first place. While I agree the shelters should be run properly and actually be shelter to rehomeable animals, I wish wish wish that people would get up in arms at the people dumping, not claiming, abandoning, neglecting their pets in the first place. Shelters are a poor second to dogs actually staying in their homes. This is where the biggest effort needs to be made. I shake my head every time there is this kind of thread bemoaning the shortcoming of rescue/ shelter. Why is there no bemoaning the dumping of pets. Wouldn't it be nice if less pets ended up in shelters

Sorry Gruflife, but if you had read a fraction of what goes on in that place you would not be wondering why people are getting so upset about it.

Obviously every one would like people to be more responsible when buying their pets and look after them for life but that is not what this is about. This is about people who are entrusted to 'look after' the animals in the care, doing the exact opposite. This is about the animals. They may have had the misfortune of having crappy owners but they do not deserve what happens to them in there.

I beg to differ teekay... Gruf has a very valid point there...

If more effort went into reducing the easy "turnover" of pets, then maybe shelters would be less crowded and therefore be able to do more about their rehoming rates.

Pounds and shelters are only in existence because people let their animals end up there - for whatever reason - and the space in pounds/shelters is actually finite...

Releasing animals to rescue is not the solution to the initial problem - it's a fallback for an untenable position.

T.

[Loving my Oldies]

.........and his reason was "because I can"

And that just about sums it all up. The man and some of his colleagues are psychopaths.

Edited January 22, 2015 by Dame Danny's Darling

[teekay]

I don my flame suit and once again say the very first thing that comes into mynhead is why why why is there not the outrage, the energy, the investigation, into why the hell so many dogs end up in these places in the first place. While I agree the shelters should be run properly and actually be shelter to rehomeable animals, I wish wish wish that people would get up in arms at the people dumping, not claiming, abandoning, neglecting their pets in the first place. Shelters are a poor second to dogs actually staying in their homes. This is where the biggest effort needs to be made. I shake my head every time there is this kind of thread bemoaning the shortcoming of rescue/ shelter. Why is there no bemoaning the dumping of pets. Wouldn't it be nice if less pets ended up in shelters

Sorry Gruflife, but if you had read a fraction of what goes on in that place you would not be wondering why people are getting so upset about it.

Obviously every one would like people to be more responsible when buying their pets and look after them for life but that is not what this is about. This is about people who are entrusted to 'look after' the animals in the care, doing the exact opposite. This is about the animals. They may have had the misfortune of having crappy owners but they do not deserve what happens to them in there.

I beg to differ teekay... Gruf has a very valid point there...

If more effort went into reducing the easy "turnover" of pets, then maybe shelters would be less crowded and therefore be able to do more about their rehoming rates.

Pounds and shelters are only in existence because people let their animals end up there - for whatever reason - and the space in pounds/shelters is actually finite...

Releasing animals to rescue is not the solution to the initial problem - it's a fallback for an untenable position.

T.

You misunderstand me, I am not saying something should not be done about educating the public to try and reduce the number of dumped pets. It's a disgrace. What I am saying is right here and now there are a handful of people, who are supposed to be in the business of caring for animals, getting away with cruelty and that is why there is such an outrage. The way the LDH is run can be changed and soon, the problem of irresponsible ownership is massive and will not change in the near future. I guess I feel we need to pick our battles right now and I do not want to hear about one more dog unnecessarily euthed willy nilly or one more litter of puppies destroyed because they were too much work.

Ranting about the irresponsible owners will not save the dogs that are there right now and that is what this thread is about.

[cavNrott]

The LDH needs a complete change of management. It should have happened years ago. As long as current management is running the LDH nothing is likely to change. What we'll see will be all smoke and mirrors.

I remember when CPR were saving all those small dogs and when it was suddenly brought to a halt for no reason other than "because I can".

[Loving my Oldies]

Ranting about the irresponsible owners will not save the dogs that are there right now and that is what this thread is about.

:clap:

[Cody]

I don my flame suit and once again say the very first thing that comes into mynhead is why why why is there not the outrage, the energy, the investigation, into why the hell so many dogs end up in these places in the first place. While I agree the shelters should be run properly and actually be shelter to rehomeable animals, I wish wish wish that people would get up in arms at the people dumping, not claiming, abandoning, neglecting their pets in the first place. Shelters are a poor second to dogs actually staying in their homes. This is where the biggest effort needs to be made. I shake my head every time there is this kind of thread bemoaning the shortcoming of rescue/ shelter. Why is there no bemoaning the dumping of pets. Wouldn't it be nice if less pets ended up in shelters

I agree with you.

[Animal House]

No need to don a flame suit Gruf, it would be wonderful if dogs didn't end up in shelters in the first place, absolutely.

Mandatory (maybe subsidised) desexing (unless a breeder/show dog) microchipping, banning pet shop sales of animals, same for puppy farms, public education, etc etc all needs to be implemented. People have to take responsibility for their animals, sadly I can't see it changing anytime soon, despite petitions and outrage on several of those issues.

But in the meantime, the Lost Dogs Home have a disgusting kill rate, the many, many stories from former employees about the place is sickening, and an idiot for a MD who is more interested in profit than animals, etc etc....all this needs to be investigated, it's long overdue and I'm hoping the Gov't doesn't fudge it.

[stellnme]

Thank God this has happened. It has nothing to do with shelters having finite space, these dogs (and cats) are being killed for ear infections, skin problems, being "timid". No effort is made to reunite them with owners. Good rescues are refused permission to take an animal, and this has been happening for a long time. They do not operate in Qld anymore - the AWL has been granted the contracts, much to the relief of animal lovers everywhere who know what happens. The cruelty is astonishing.

Yes, some owners need to step up and look after their animals properly and I see this all the time, but let's not confuse the issue here - this inquiry is long overdue and much needed. Heartbreaking stuff indeed.

[Aphra]

The enquiry into the LDH is overdue. Because whatever people do or how ever they behave with their pets, shelters should be safe places for them. We'd never say that because some parents treat their children badly, childrens homes should be allowed to hurt children. We shouldn't be punishing the pets for the faults of their owners.

But I do take exception to the idea that people are behaving badly. I've spent the last three evenings running statistics from the Lost Dogs Home, the Victoria RSPCA, and just for fun, NSW pound numbers, the AWL in QLD and the Geelong Animal Welfare Society.

Because as I was running the figures from the LDH's annual report I found something really interesting. Of the total number of dogs going into the LDH, the public are pulling 84% of them out again. There is a 68% reclaim rate for dogs, added to that the numbers of dogs adopted and thanks to the public, 3/4 of the dogs that go into the LDH make it out again. That the LDH chooses to kill 46% of the unclaimed dogs is down to them.

The Victorian RSPCA reclaim/adoption rate is 84% (of total dog intake), across NSW 72% of pound dogs are reclaimed/rehomed or released to rescue. The latest research (2013) says that 78% of dogs and 91% of cats are desexed.

The public are already doing a pretty good job of looking after pets, it's about time the pound system stepped up to the plate.

Once you look at the figures it's so frustrating because it wouldn't take a huge effort by pounds and shelters to improve the kill rate enormously without much effort. if the LDH would just post photos of found pets on a website they'd improve their reclaim rate, but they have consistently refused to do so.

[Jed]

The outcome will be interesting. It is much more profitable for a shelter which is working for councils, to euth than to rehome. They are paid for each one, and with euth, the costs are much less than to rehome = more profit. Appalling ethos, appalling culture, upheld by management.

Sickening, and has been for a long time. People have been trying to instigate change for ............. how long? Years

[melzawelza]

The enquiry into the LDH is overdue. Because whatever people do or how ever they behave with their pets, shelters should be safe places for them. We'd never say that because some parents treat their children badly, childrens homes should be allowed to hurt children. We shouldn't be punishing the pets for the faults of their owners.

But I do take exception to the idea that people are behaving badly. I've spent the last three evenings running statistics from the Lost Dogs Home, the Victoria RSPCA, and just for fun, NSW pound numbers, the AWL in QLD and the Geelong Animal Welfare Society.

Because as I was running the figures from the LDH's annual report I found something really interesting. Of the total number of dogs going into the LDH, the public are pulling 84% of them out again. There is a 68% reclaim rate for dogs, added to that the numbers of dogs adopted and thanks to the public, 3/4 of the dogs that go into the LDH make it out again. That the LDH chooses to kill 46% of the unclaimed dogs is down to them.

The Victorian RSPCA reclaim/adoption rate is 84% (of total dog intake), across NSW 72% of pound dogs are reclaimed/rehomed or released to rescue. The latest research (2013) says that 78% of dogs and 91% of cats are desexed.

The public are already doing a pretty good job of looking after pets, it's about time the pound system stepped up to the plate.

Once you look at the figures it's so frustrating because it wouldn't take a huge effort by pounds and shelters to improve the kill rate enormously without much effort. if the LDH would just post photos of found pets on a website they'd improve their reclaim rate, but they have consistently refused to do so.

Great post Aphra. Really great.

Agree on both your points - that if people are 'irresponsible' with their pets then that doesn't give the shelter the right to treat them badly and kill them en masse.

But I also strongly agree with your point that overwhelmingly people do a bloody fantastic job with their pets. Shel at Saving Pets has run the NSW stats and from memory between 5-10% of pets actually need the services of a pound in any given year, and only around 2-4% of pets actually aren't reclaimed and need to be found a new home. People are overwhelmingly either keeping their pets out of the shelter altogether or reclaiming them if they do end up there.

I'd also like to add that those that don't reclaim are not automatically irresponsible and bad pet owners. People can fall on hard times and really struggle to pay what are often extremely high reclaim fees. In NSW, a dog must be lifetime registered before it is released from a pound. If the dog isn't desexed the cost of registration alone is $188. If you add in impound fee (up to $80) and a daily maintenance rate (between $30-$50) this can mean that someone trying to reclaim their pet on the same day it entered the shelter often needs to come up with close to $300 on the spot. If they have two dogs, they're looking at $600.

Part of what we at Team Dog do is assist these people get their pets home. What we are seeing is people being up for, say, $300. They might have $200 or $250 to pay but that isn't enough, so they start calling around to friends and family. After a couple of days they've found the $300, but by this point with a $40 maintenance fee they're now up for $380.... it basically spirals out of control and before we know it the fees are at $800 and there is absolutely no way for them to get their pet back.

These people aren't callous, they aren't 'dumping' their dogs. They desperately want their pet home and the fees are preventing them from being able to do so.

People call is in tears thinking their pet is going to be killed, when it has a home (and at the LDH there's a 50% chance it WILL be killed). Some pounds waive fees or allow payment plans, others don't. Some Sydney pounds are now referring people to us which is great.

When it comes to surrenders, pet retention programs in the states are showing that a LOT of people coming to shelters to surrender their pets are, again, not 'irresponsible', callous or uncaring. They love their pets and don't want to give them up, but something in their life is making them feel that this is necessary. Downtown Dog rescue work out of an LA shelter and their intervention program kept over 2,000 pets out of the shelter in their first year of operation. Just being non judgemental and offering a helping hand kept those pets at home.

http://www.downtowndogrescue.org/2013-shelter-intervention-program-stats/

Are there some people that are shitty pet owners, don't care about them, don't bother to do the basics with them and 'dump' them? Sure. But they truly are the minority. As Aphra's stats show, almost all pets go home and as Shel @ Saving Pets stats show, extremely few pets ever need a new home through a shelter. And as Downtown Dog Rescue shows (and our work with Team Dog has shown), many of the people who surrender or don't reclaim their pets really wanted them back home or didn't want to surrender but didn't see any other option. Stopping the judgmental 'asshole owners' stuff and just lending a helping hand has a huge positive effect not only for the pets but for their people, too.

^^ All of that should actually be irrelevant in this discussion, anyway. How the pets got there does not matter. The LDH is supposed to be an animal welfare organisation, and killing 50% of the animals that need their help is not meeting their welfare or doing their jobs by any stretch.

ETA: Here's what Team Dog achieved in our first year of operation. Not as impressive as DDR, but I can tell you we weren't limited by the amount of people who wanted our help to keep their pets, we were limited by the amount of hours we can put in to it while working full time and resources. We've got volunteers now and much more resources at our disposal so we should be able to prevent a lot more surrenders this year.

http://www.teamdog.com.au/2014-reflection/

Edited January 23, 2015 by melzawelza