Jump to content
Powerlegs

Rescuer found guilty

14 posts in this topic

I don't actually know this rescue or what happened other than the article.


https://www.smh.com.au/national/queensland/animal-rescuer-guilty-of-neglect-had-been-asking-for-donations-20190228-p510r4.html?ref=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=rss_feed

 

Sorry there's a couple of grubby photos so I've only put the link in case people find it upsetting. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s horrible, I’m so glad someone spotted this before the animals numbers got any higher. Especially in all this heat :’( 

 

Im confused by the last line about approved animals. Does this mean she will still be acting as a “rescue” or is it more privately owned animals aka pets?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure really but I assume that means she will have regular inspections and custody of animals would have to be approved by them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiler

Animal rescue founder Danielle Lamprecht convicted of nine animal neglect charges

Kay Dibben, The Courier-Mail
February 27, 2019 6:19pm
Subscriber only
  •  
  •  
  •  

THE founder of an animal rescue group, who kept dogs in “appalling conditions’’ has been convicted of nine animal neglect charges and barred from keeping animals for five years.

Danielle Lamprecht, 45, founder of Couch Surfers, pleaded guilty to two counts of failing to treat injuries and seven counts of failing to provide appropriate living conditions for animals.

“There were 12 dogs that were being kept in appalling conditions,’’ RSPCA Queensland spokesman Michael Beatty said.

“They were living on urine and faeces and some were confined in small crates that had no water and no room for them to move around. It was very distressing.’’

d636f5458fa010e1d271a60dbd549ab1?width=1024Hulk, an American Bulldog, was confined to a cage filled with urine and faeces.

Lamprecht founded Couch Surfers animal rescue in Deception Bay in December, 2017, but operated it mostly from a Facebook page, Caboolture Magistrates Court heard.

She posted regular pleas to the public for donations of cash, direct payments for dog training and veterinary treatment and items such as food, blankets and beds.

Her adoption fees ranged from $200 to $600, the court heard.

An RSPCA inspector went to Lamprecht’s Deception Bay home in January, last year, after receiving reports of animals left unattended or confined in parked vehicles.

b3b37d2db9b1aadcf30412d1e7b36c36?width=316Rover did not have access to water. 87c3d861bef71ca3ad4a452738018469?width=316There was insufficient ventilation in the room where dogs were confined.

Inside the house the inspector found bare concrete covered in urine and faeces and some dogs in crates that were not large enough for them to stand up in, and which had no water.

An American bulldog named Hulk and an Australian bulldog, Gemma, were found in small crates in the living room, without clean water, bedding or sufficient ventilation.

Gus, a North Queensland Bullhound, was confined to a bedroom, where there was a large build up of urine, faeces and rubbish on the floor.

37161d93efb1d91fe8a34474903a2a64?width=1024Heidi was contained in one of the children’s bedrooms, where there were faeces on the floor and a “putrid stench”.

Lamprecht was charged with failing to provide appropriate treatment for Gus’s painful ear infection and for Johnson bulldog, Boof’s inflamed and infected eyes.

Boof had been kept in a dirty laundry, with no access to clean water.

Rhodesian ridgeback Heidi was found in a child’s bedroom, with urine and faeces and no water.

4b84f6133c06ff295035ad8e971c90dd?width=1024A bowl of drinking water containing faeces.

Other dogs were found in a garage, a bedroom or the living area, with urine and faeces around them and the inspectors believed dogs had even been kept in the bathroom.

Lamprecht told the inspector she was “in over her head’’ and did not have the facilities to manage the number of dogs she had.

She said she had just been trying to rescue the dogs and was concerned they would be euthanised if they were surrendered to a shelter.

Lamprecht was sentenced to one year’s probation, with no conviction recorded, and ordered to pay court and veterinary costs of more than $1500.

She was left with two dogs, but prohibited from keeping any animals, other than those approved by RSPCA Queensland’s Chief Inspector, for five years.

It means she cannot be involved in Couch Surfers.

“This was a case where animals suffered because, despite the defendant’s best intentions, she was simply not providing the necessary care,’’ Mr Beatty said.

  •  
  •  
  •  
SPONSORED STORIES

 

  •  
  • Behind a paywall, pics incl
Edited by Powerlegs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RuralPug   

She is no longer allowed to be associated with that rescue, according to one of the articles above.
 

Quote

She was also ordered to pay court and veterinary costs of over $1500 and was given a five year prohibition order for all animals other than as approved by RSPCA QLD Chief Inspector.

This means she has to remove herself from all Couch Surfer Operations.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That makes a touch more sense - it reads like the rescue will continue operating under the other people? The pet rescue contact is different to the person who was hoarding/overwhelmed/cutting costs but that could mean anything from one person to multiple people (I notice the fb page is gone). I'm glad someone called it in before it got too bad, but I do wish articles like this would publish the reason it got so bad if known? Then maybe can raise awareness more on spotting when someone is getting overwhelmed or cutting costs or hoarding or moving into a sort of "rescue mill" and intervene faster.

I'll assume those two dogs are pet dogs - but hopefully the RSPCA will still check in to make sure she has capacity to care for the two and they dont get treated like the rescue dogs :(

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stellnme   

If she was a carer, where is the checking and due diligence from the rescue group?  Vetting of foster carers should be a no brainer for an ethical rescue group.  Sadly ,anyone can set themselves up and call it a rescue group , when it can be anything but good rescue.  It seems any donations here weren't being used for the animals' benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maddy   
1 hour ago, ~Anne~ said:

To be fair to PR, it’s a different contact name. Perhaps the woman charged was one of several in the group, or a carer for the group only.

She was the founder of the group. And I'd be willing to bet money that whoever is named as the new contact for PR, is someone very close to her. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2019 at 1:49 PM, Maddy said:

Good to see that PR were quick to shut down their account.

Oh wait.. https://www.petrescue.com.au/groups/11544/Couch-Surfers-Animal-Rescue- :|

 

PR have deleted accounts for less than that.

Apparently 'gross misconduct'' will get you removed so maybe animal welfare charges don't count if you change the contact name. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×