Jump to content

RSPCA South Australia

Recommended Posts

The RSPCA South Australia wants to euthanize 10 healthy Border Collies who just gave birth to puppies which they intend to sell for $1250 each. Their excuse is the dogs are not rehomable, which is just an excuse. WISH Animal Rescue Team Perth W.A. has taken action to rescue the dogs but need more help. Please sign the petition which you can find on FB to stop this horrific decision of the RSPCA which is supposed to be a rescue org not a killing station!

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh my?


this is video of the dogs they seized.


no one is safe then


this is the information with the video.


"OMG .. the Border Collie debacle in South Australia. 
Video was released today of the rspca Inspector assessing the dogs prior to seizing them. This is just mind blowing, it's very obvious to me these people don't have a clue what they're doing and are making it up as they go along.
Things to note:
• spotlessly clean, roomy kennel, with shadecloth over.
• dogs are well groomed and look to be clean and in good condition.
• these grubs were able to assess 4 dogs in 5 minutes, and only entered the kennel for 2 minutes.
• no attempt was made to interact with the dogs, or even speak to them.
• no attempt was made to come down to the level of the dogs, or to sit quietly and let them come to you.
• the "little blue or grey" one who hid in the kennel was given a death sentence because it did not come rushing out with tail wagging at the total stranger who had entered it's home.
• these dogs are exhibiting - in my opinion - very typical behaviour for Border Collies, they are a working breed, they are quick on their feet and they tend to 'slink' around, as they do when working sheep.
• dogs aren't silly, when a stranger comes into their kennel exhibiting wary behaviour and not trying to engage with them at all, they are going to hide from that person if possible, guaranteed.
4 of the 10 seized dogs have now been put to sleep by the rspca, despite massive public outcry calling for them to be released to a rescue for rehabilitation. 
Well if this doesn't enable ANKC members to see the reality of what these criminals are doing, nothing will. Any one of us could be in this situation at some point in the future. I just cannot believe the rspca is getting away with this and the Minister won't lift a finger to step in and stop this sheer insanity."





WISH Animal Rescue Team Perth WALike Page

15 hrs · 

This footage was sent to us today, showing the RSPCA conducting "inspections and assessments" at the Breeders Facility. I think the video speaks for itself..RSPCA are dead to us, they are gone but this is never ever forgotten xxx

Edited by asal
Link to post
Share on other sites

The rspca's side of the story... fascinating.. nothing was allowed to be published while George Pell was facing or during trial. but these people have been tried by press release in this already?


even added that "Both defendants have previously been convicted of dog breeding offences in Victoria."  yet a convicted rapist is no mention is allowed to have past convictions revealed on the grounds it is prejudicial to the current case?

Is it because they will not be tried before a jury ,  therefore trial by media is fine ............ 





Edited by asal
Link to post
Share on other sites

WISH Animal Rescue Team Perth WALike Page

Yesterday at 09:30 3/4/2019

A note to RSPCA South Australia and RSPCA Australia

We know your watching.
We know your reading this.
We know you've been inundated with hundreds of calls and emails.
We know more than 75000 people support us in our attempt to save the Border Collies.
We know that you want to shut the breeder down.
But we also know that killings these dogs to "prove" a point, isn't the answer.

When Fridays court proceedings concluded, and you were awarded the right to decide what happens with the Border Collies now in your care, we cringed. Cringed because we knew your plan was the kill them. We have been asked how we know this, and the answer is simple. YOU TOLD US in the court documents. "The application said that it was in the best interests of the animals that some (if not all) of the adult dogs be humanely euthanized, and that the rest of the dogs be re-homed from the shelter to a new family or rescue facility." Not only does this show us that you already had your mind made up regarding the adults, but that you proposed the option of "rescue facility". So why now only days later are you stating that you will not allow another rescue group to take them on, or even give us the chance to asses them for ourselves.

Your media release stated that "We already have very experienced foster carers who could be called upon if the dogs were capable of benefitting from housing in a domestic environment, and were safe to do so. Unfortunately neither is the case. The dogs’ behaviour indicates that they’ve had little or no experience of life outside a cage. Hence, they have likely never enjoyed the usual human interaction and socialisation received by family pets.". However we have 37 in care that beg to differ this story. We have adults upwards of 6 years old, and all they have ever known is kennels, yet are adapting perfectly, around children, babies, other dogs, cats horses, chickens, everything - and they are settling better than anyone could have expected or hoped.

You stated that financially you cannot continue to house the 10 adults, and continue to pay expenses for them. We will take them off your hands TODAY. We will even assist in some of those costs and pay you $1000 PER ADULT. That is $10,000 towards your bills you have acquired. We will ADOPT all 10 adults from you and bring them into WISH Care. We will take over all future vet work, including desexing them and ending the breeding cycle for these ten, just like we have with the 37 in our care. Handing them over will not only free your kennels, but help you financially. Give us a month, let us place them with experienced foster carers who already know what they are dealing with as they have fostered siblings, aunts, mothers to your ten. Let us show you that we can save them. Let us allow you to show the public, that you choose an animals right to live, over the politics.

Releasing these animals will not effect your upcoming court case. You have the evidence you need now. Please let them be dogs again, please let us save them.

#savethebordercollies #wishanimalrescue

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites



Prior to 1.39 Video footage at the breeders facility, from 1.39 filmed at rspca facility.....

Edited by asal
The first scenes are before seized,, the later scenes are at rspca pens
Link to post
Share on other sites


copied from fb page



"..RSPCA SA temperament test, one of many recent ones, where they stated the animals could not be rehomed, only took them a few minutes to decide.
Interesting background story to this process indeed. You see these puppies would have been homed, but on the first RSPCA inspection, the kennel came down with Kennel cough, so animals had to be quarantined.
Then the RSPCA returned and made this decision, and applied the same process to 70 other lovely dogs.
Luckily the RSPCA could only seize 10, pregnant bitches.
That enabled me to get these puppies support and new homes, and a successful call out to other great shelters to get the rest to safety.
Full story to come, with a fundraiser to help those great carers.
We are still in the courts to safe guard those taken by the RSPCA. Who have had two reports done that they must be put down asap, my reports from top local vets and Behaviourists beg to differ.
Find out today if we have saved them, or if they will be killed.


  • These pups would have already been re-homed except the rspca bought KENNEL COUGH in on their shoes on their previous visit so the whole place had to be quarantined. 
    Your tax dollars are given to the rspca via govt grants to enable them to do this Inspectorate work.
     These dogs would be fine in a home 1 family situation ! Border Collies are not supposed to be friendly with strangers and I imagine their humans would have been distraught which they would have picked up on and been stressed  Why did they take them anyway, the run was spotless and they looked clean and in lovely condition.....OR was it just because their pups could be sold for heaps "






Link to post
Share on other sites

Comments and video shared, I was taught never to make eye contact with a dog I dont know as it is a threatening thing to do to a dog you dont know, until you have been introduced and the dog accepts you?  Apparently all these videos are at the property of the breeder and their pens and sheds....




What a relief I was taught correctly, but wait, The ten were taken for not making eye contact, four of these dogs have now been put down because they failed to make eye contact when reassessed?



quotes that are with the video below



"Yet another assessment, thanks to whoever.
Time to change how animal welfare is applied, who applies the law, and some well overdue honest and open debate, in favour of the animals for a change.
I would have gone in and sat down, as owner had no issue with the dog, and let it come to me, surely to kill based on this quick assessment is wrong.
The owners charges are based on this assessment as well."


"Another of the behaviour tests carried out on the Border Collies by the rspca.
Diagnosis: welfare state is extremely poor, suffering SEVERE MENTAL HARM.
Recommendation: to be euthanised as soon as possible.
Well this just leaves me speechless, this is cruelty of the highest order! 
Many dogs will avoid eye contact if you are poking a phone at them, l actually feel sick seeing this. Throws food at them instead of sitting down, looking in the other direction and softly offering a treat."






" Well if you needed any more proof that the rspca has morphed into PETA, this video is it! They went there to find dogs to kill not to help dogs in need or suffering.
Since when is SEVERE MENTAL HARM listed in the legislation as a reason to seize and destroy? I will tell you when ... NEVER!

Who is this woman? She is not a behaviourist. Petition is the only answer."
  • what is the story behind why they were there in the first place. If it is because of the number of dogs they are breeding it doesn't fit with their approval of the dog/puppy farm they just gave their blessing to up north.
    •  I was going to ask this too, because those kennels look good for kennels.
      •  OMFG. I just watched this, something needs to be done. Have these animals been saved. If I walked into any kennel of a dog I did not know and threw biscuits at it why oh why would it come out. The only reason would be if it was a very hungry savage beast and this is obviously a dog that is not hungry or treat motivated nor was it fearful or savage. Please why are they at this property.
      •  The girlfriend of the owner has previous convictions for running unsatisfactory puppy farms, so the owner of this more than adequate facility is guilty by association according to the rspca, these were revenge raids.
      • The kennel is Council approved by the way.
      •  This is crap do you have to let them onto your property and into the kennels with your dogs
      •  Unless you know your rights and have an action plan in place (a local policeman you know, or your local member who will drop everything and come to vouch for you), yes, they will force their way in.
        The legislation says they can only enter your property without your permission if there is actual cruelty or neglect evident from the front fence, then you can't stop them.
        Legally you can stop them setting foot inside your front gate but it's imperative to know your legislation in relation to entry.
      • could someone please explain to me why they are taking a towel into each kennel? Is 'towel therapy' a new theory of how to scare dogs more "look at this thing i can wave in your face because I'm not scary enough"
Edited by asal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever says RSPCA can't come onto your property unless they can see neglect or cruelty is sadly mistaken... all they need is a single complaint from an anonymous source. The only structure they cannot enter without a warrant or permission is your house. Have a good read of POCTAA... it's there in black and white.


The dogs in the video were reacting exactly how I'd expect when a GROUP of people with strange equipment are standing talking and pointing at them... especially as there is actually little encouragement coming from said people to make the dogs feel less wary. The body language displayed from the so-called assessors is so so wrong in this regard... the dogs in this video have definitely been set up to fail whatever "temperament" test is being used here.


I have worked in boarding kennels where we had security trained dogs, fearful and upset pets, and animals with various degrees of social incompetence... NEVER did I have any issues interacting positively with said animals. I've also been involved in rescue situations where I had to select which animals from the pounds we could take in... again,  I had little difficulty approaching animals showing fear or wariness of strangers in an adverse environment... and I'm not formally "qualified" in any form of animal behaviour assessment.


The first thing I would expect of anyone conducting such a test to deem whether an animal is so badly damaged that it requires euthanaisia, is to do the testing on single dogs... the dogs in this video were feeding of each other's fear/wariness... compounding issues that possibly would not have been evident if assessed singly. I would say that the one dog that initially did try approaching (but failed to receive any positive encouragement to interact), would possibly have been VERY different if he/she was alone and had received positive encouragement.



  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another point of view from Oscar's Law site -https://www.oscarslaw.org/blog/update-on-south-australian-puppy-farmers?fbclid=IwAR0HRuELJqXfN880pIyDdtBQ6rGlad7IslDUOVLTeIIId_J3p5ZgEHovqj0


Update on South Australian puppy farmers Colin Ross, Kerrie Fitzpatrick

 On March 29 at the Supreme Court of South Australia,   Colin Ross failed in his bid to regain control over the dogs seized by RSPCA SA.  We are pleased that the courts dismissed his appeal and that the dogs won't be taken to a "third party breeder at Mr Ross's expense" as the courts heard. Colin has appeared in court before in Victoria and found guilty of operating an illegal puppy factory, failing to register dogs, amongst some of the charges and is currently still on a good behavior bond in Victoria. Kerrie Fitzpatrick has a ten year banning order in place in Victoria.

In our opinion, based on 26 years of rescuing dogs from puppy factories, most seized puppy factory dogs rehabilitate best in a calm, safe home environment with experienced foster carers  and the rescue groups we work with have proven this approach works best many times over many years. It also should be stated that we believe the current animal welfare system in relation to enforcement, seizure and prosecution powers in Australia is broken, and that we have recently been doing a lot of work with various other people and organisations on this issue.  We fully support an Independent Office of Animal Welfare, a complete overhaul of the Prevention of Cruelty To Animals Act and a review of who is granted powers of enforcement and prosecution in regards to animal welfare. 

This is not a post about the fate of the dogs,  or the flawed assessment after 5 months that lead to a report stating they should be killed. Our opinion is clear on what should happen to the seized dogs.  It's about how puppy farmers and their appointed spokesperson in SA is manipulating the situation in order to win the cruelty case so they can continue with their puppy factory. A huge amount of tax free income is at stake here. Unfortunately this is a pattern of behavior we have previously witnessed.

The videos being released on social media were taken in October 2018 during one of the many inspections of the puppy factory, they are not the behavioural assessments that lead to an independent report stating the dogs should be killed as the person in SA is suggesting. They are initial observations of the dogs behaviour in the puppy factory, we don't necessarily agree with some of those observations, and we don't support the final report stating the dogs should be killed.  What the videos do show, is terrified traumatised puppy factory dogs, in other words, normal behaviour on a puppy factory. Because puppy farmers damage dogs, thats just what they do, they deny them environmental enrichment, socialisation, they live a life of deprivation and puppies are born into this rotten unhealthy environment. This type of psychological trauma inflicted on dogs is something rescue groups have to deal with on a regular basis. The best thing and only hope for these dogs is immediate seizure and placement with an experienced foster care network. Precedents for this course of action has been established many times in the past. We do realise that seized dogs cannot be placed into the care of experienced rescue groups until a court rules on a 'disposal order', an (unfortunately named ) order which determines ownership of the dogs, once ownership is determined by this order dogs be placed into the community foster care system. Anyone who inflicts this sort of damage on dogs should be banned from ever doing it again, they should not be given the chance to relocate to a different state and start again, even if their spokesperson in SA is saying they will now run a 'better' puppy farm. 

Taking videos and documenting conditions, behaviours, environments is normal procedure during initial cruelty investigations on any puppy factory. The videos were disclosed to the puppy farmers legal team as part of whats known as 'discovery', a legal requirement in all legal cases. The videos have been leaked by the puppy farmers and the person supporting them in SA, and are being deliberately misrepresented by suggesting its the actual behaviour assessment that lead to a report recommending dogs be killed. This is being done in order to attempt to build a defence to their cruelty charges. It should be pointed out that before the dogs were seized, the puppy farmers were given more than enough time to fix any breaches and comply with the legislation. They refused.

It's disappointing that the public are being misled, this is exactly what the puppy farmers wanted to achieve. In regards to the report written by the animal behaviourists, we reiterate our position based on our experience. Most puppy factory survivors rehabilitate best in a calm, safe, home environment with experienced foster carers. There is plenty of evidence and studies publicly available that proves, behavioural assessments in a pound or puppy factory situation are flawed and are not reliable in predicting behaviour, and don't achieve whats best for the dog. Perhaps this is one positive that this case will achieve, a change in our current system. 

sick pup being sold on trading postWe stand with the many brave people that reported this puppy factory and who have unfortunately had to have their sick pups put down, or fork out thousands of dollars for veterinary treatment. It is a known fact that the first few weeks of a pups life, what they learn from their mother and their environment, determines their behaviour going forward. Pups born in puppy factories to fearful, anxious, sick mothers, in large noisy sheds,  learn from their mothers and the environment they are raised. These anxious fearful pups go on to require extensive rehabilitation.  The puppy farmers continue to breed, and continue to sell their sick, in some cases clearly inbred, puppies on trading post and gumtree under a variety of names and phone numbers in order to fool the public. 

There is so much more we would like to divulge at this moment in time, we will be providing the full story, once the court case is over, as we do not want to put the case at risk, and play into the current tactics the puppy farmers and the person in SA who they have approached to help them are using.

Something to keep in mind, based on our experience, here is how a typical puppy farmer facing cruelty charges starts to build a defence.

1. Discredit everyone,  authorities, politicians, media, anyone that speaks against puppy factories. Use language that attempts to normalise puppy factories. Deny the owners have previous convictions, say they are 'good people' trying to breed dogs, say they have a long family history of breeding dogs, say they are facing bankruptcy for just trying to do right thing, say the puppy farmers are being harassed,  just say anything , deflect deflect deflect. Ask the vet that the puppy farmers use for semen collection, progesterone testing, artificial insemination, microchips etc to write a report saying dogs are fine, nothing wrong with them.  Release that report as actual "scientific professional evidence nothing wrong with dogs"  (Vets working for puppy farmers will protect their income and regularly take the witness stand to say nothing is wrong with their clients dogs, we have witnessed this in every puppy farm cruelty case ) 

2. Release some dogs to rescue (sometimes this is the only chance dogs have to escape the puppy factory, its not done out of any concern for the dogs, only concern for themselves. Many times puppy farmers will call in people to take dogs if they know a council inspection is imminent and they are over their limit. Many rescue groups around Australia do this often and work incredibly hard to rehabilitate these damaged dogs and find them homes)

3. Hide the bulk of the dogs on other puppy factories (In this particular case,  they had a Council permit for 65 adults, but had in excess of 300 dogs on site, one wonders why the Council allowed this to happen. We do have further information on this particular Council's unethical behaviour, and we are lodging a complaint with the Ombudsman and the relevant Minister)

4. Appoint one of the staff members, or a supporter, as the "New Manager" 

Typical defence "Your Honour, my client has done the right thing, they have given their beloved dogs to rescue groups so they can find good homes, they have appointed a new manager to ensure the 'breeding facility' continues to comply with all legislation. Their own vet even said nothing is wrong with these dogs" 

We did say in our original post, that these puppy farmers would seek out help to manipulate the public, and thats exactly what you are all witnessing now. We can all play a part in saving dogs from puppy factories, rejoice in their rescue, work at shutting the puppy factories down. We don't need to thank the puppy farmer for releasing some dogs to rescue, and hiding the rest on other puppy factories, we don't need to work on building 'better' puppy farms, because everyone knows, there is no such thing as a 'good' puppy factory.

It says a lot about the character of a person when criminally convicted animal abusers keep running to them for help when they are once again caught.   

Tell your friends
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Does not sound like the rescue group are on the side of the puppy farm?




"at least Most of them been SAVED ... OMG.."



WISH Animal Rescue Team Perth WALike Page

 We are feeling a little exhausted this week (but far, far from over it)after begging for these 10 plus innocent lives for 2 week - to no avail. Here in this video, while tears ran down my face from exhaustion and excitement, as we headed back from SA, loaded up with dogs in our car and the WISH RV full to the rim and dog trailer full of love and with all 42 of us just wanting to get home to WA. We put our favourite Jimmy Barnes on and got behind this truckie, who didn’t even know - that he was bringing us 42 home safely - after an exhausting 5 days on the road to rescue. Whoever you are, we thank you, you didnt even know that you were at the time our gurdian angel and thanks Jimmy you rock...
But I need to say this.
 Zoo’s here have all changed. Look what Steve Irwin did and his wonderful family continue to do. They made all their animals worlds, as natural as possible. Every time we are sent a video from the public, in regards to this issue (and we have so many now) we are horrified to see the barbaric conditions out domestic dogs are kept in, while humans fight their fights in courts. We know of dogs that spend months to years on end in solitary confinement, when human court cases are impending. We find this whole situation a set up to fail from the start. Since October last year when they were seized, they have done nothing to restore the balance in these poor dogs. They did nothing for them to help them over come their fears. We are watching 37 dogs now after only a week, starting to play with toys and each other. We are seeing their playful side and puppyhood. We do not have an issue with the seizing of them for 
prosecution but OMG even humans in jail get tv, 3 meals a day, and exercise time out in the sunshine. If this was their intention to from the start to keep them isolated from their pack members (and they stated over crowding in breeders pens apparently 2 were kept together-well so they say) the one security they have even known. And being a pack member means, naturally, their is security in numbers. We will always be gutted for the fact.
They took them from a neglectful situation and placed them in isolation. They cut out their sunshine and friends and and once a few had pups removed them from their mothers to leave them abandoned and alone. They studied them like monkeys in a zoo. With clip boards in hands. And not once have we seen a tear or soft word of compassion for these poor 10 adults and for that we will always be sorry, that they never gave us the chance to show them love and a beautiful world. They died in fear and unloved in a cold callous world and that is a hard pill to swallow. Our intentions was never ever to bad mouth the rspca, our only and utmost goal here-was to save them from death and isolation. This could of been handled better by them-if the dogs best interest was their main concern. But, their only concern was the prosecution of the breeders which we totally understand also but why did it have to be at the disgusting ending of these 4 dogs and we expect all 10. They have stated they are in fc and they can not release pictures and we feel that is absolute rubbish. They are the property of the rspca now to do as they wish hence the euthanasia of 4. If they have the right to euthanise them now, they have the right to take happy fc pictures of them being rehabilitated in fc homes. We have 37 in fc but there is over 80 others safe from the breeders and the rspca, and the other rescues are worried about the rspca and what they might do, if they find out who has them. But we are the voice for these puppy mill dogs and don’t bow down to being bullied by people in high places. Our love of dogs gives us the strength we need to stand tall and protect these innocent lives, as it seems no one else has to date. We have received only a few people saying, that we took their proof for courts and we are in cahoots with the breeders. Sadly they are wrong. The only side we stand on ‘’THE ONLY ONE’’ is saving these dogs lives and getting them into protection, away from EVERYONE who just wants them for a pawn in this human game. They deserved better and 4, expecting all 10 will never know how much we fought to give them a better life but we do and, thats all that matters here and to us. XOXOX
We shouldn’t have to beg.






for some reason it will only open by highlighting and click on open in a new tab

Edited by asal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wish foundation haven't given up yet





WA bid to save death-row SA border collies goes viral

John FlintPerthNow
April 7, 2019 10:00AM


WA News

A Perth animal rescue group’s bid to save six border collies from “death row” in South Australia has generated more than 82,700 signatures on a petition.

WISH Animal Rescue Team volunteers have already done one five-day road trip across the Nullarbor to bring back 37 dogs they feared were earmarked for euthanasia.

And it is begging the RSPCA to let it have six border collie “mums” the organisation claimed were too traumatised to be rehomed.

WISH founder and president Kylie Wishart has even offered the South Australian RSPCA $1000 for each of the dogs in a bid to save them. The group’s petition has gone viral.


The six dogs were among 10 adult border collies seized from a breeding facility at Lameroo, 200km from Adelaide, on October 23 last year. Five dependent puppies were also taken and 18 have been born since.

The RSPCA claimed it found almost 300 dogs at the property, far exceeding “the breeders’ council-issued licence permitting a maximum of 100 dogs”.

The rescued dogs playing.The rescued dogs playing.

The 10 seized border collies were considered “to be in the worst condition, exhibiting the most chronic behavioural issues and mental suffering”. Four of them were put down this week to the dismay of WISH and other rescue organisations that had offered to take and rehabilitate them.

“Despite all of the rehabilitation measures, these four dogs continued to show deeply entrenched signs of chronic fear and potentially dangerous unpredictability,” the RSPCA said in a statement on Wednesday.

“As a responsible rehoming organisation, we simply cannot and will not release animals to the community that pose a significant risk to public safety.

“RSPCA staff continue to look after the six remaining adult dogs as part of ongoing efforts to rehabilitate them.”

Ms Wishart fears the six will be put down.

She said the 37 dogs taken from the breeder’s property were all adjusting very well in their new surroundings with her group’s network of foster carers across Perth.

“Out of the 37 dogs, not one has bit yet,” she said. “We’re halfway through our vet work and all our vets are falling in love with them. They’re stunning dogs.”

She said WISH volunteers made the dash from Perth to South Australia after a report prepared for the RSPCA recommended putting down many of the remaining dogs at the breeding facility.

“I believe that a large number of the dogs will continue to suffer from their severe mental health disorder, despite rehoming,” the report stated. “As such, humane euthanasia is is likely the best course of action.”

Ms Wishart said she was stunned by the huge reaction to the petition and the flood of support to the group’s Facebook page. “It has gone viral. I didn’t expect that sort of reaction. It’s insane,” she said.

Another vet who inspected the 10 seized adult dogs at the RSPCA’s Adelaide shelter on behalf of the breeder claimed the dogs were suitable to be rehomed.

These dogs simply require human interaction, not the death penalty Dr Chris Girling said.

“These dogs are not dangerous, they are timid and shy, part of the typical border collie submissive behaviour,” he wrote. He criticised the separation of the mums from their pups and said the shelter accommodation at the RSPCA was worse than where they were before.

The SA RSPCA, which has charged the breeder with 17 offences, said it “appreciated the offers from well-intentioned rescue organisations to take these dogs”.

“The professional advice RSPCA has received to date indicates it would be highly irresponsible and inhumane to place these dogs into foster care or make them available for adoption,” it stated.

“The (20) puppies currently display no major behavioural issues. All are suitable for rehoming and RSPCA is confident of finding good homes for every one of them.”

Edited by asal
Link to post
Share on other sites

BE almost a movie plot if it was not so tragic. 


Melanie Coe shared a post.



The RSPCA did an inspection on a breeding facility in mid-2018, finding minor compliance issues, shortly after that visit, several dogs became sick, so the animals were put into quarantine, resulting In a sharp rise in adult dogs, as puppies aged beyond 3 months.

October 2018; The RSPCA then raided the same facilities, sighting behavioural issues with “most of the animals” as they were shy and not coming forward to inspectors. No physical faults were mentioned, only mental health concerns. (several videos of those assessments are now available on line)

They seized 10 adults’ dogs, 5 puppies new born (2 weeks) with most being pregnant bitches.

November 2018; The RSPCA wrote to the owner, asking for animals to be signed over to avoid further costs, which were already at $3,800, sighting the dogs are better off to be put down.

December 2018; A report was completed in early December 2018, by RSPCA (ex-staff) new behaviorists, and charges readied based on the mental health issues assessed by the RSPCA.

At the same time those assessments were being drafted, the owner’s lawyers received an application from the RSPCA to kill those dogs and puppies seized, by now several seized animals had given birth to puppies.

The RSPCA also sought a massive $53,000 in costs for the upkeep of the animals over the first 10/11 weeks.

January 2018; The RSPCA issued court orders to both seize all the animals left at the facilities and to kill those in their care.

Upon receipt of the demand to kill all the animals, the owners sent in their local veterinarians to inspect the animals in the RSPCA care, his report was that the animals in the RSPCA were heathy and should not be killed.

The owners contacted Mark Aldridge, to see if he could help save the animals from being killed, supplying him with photos of the animals, legal documents, their compliance’s ect.

Mark then arranged further independent assessments of the animals in a move to save them from being killed by the RSPCA. Also making enquires with the local council to ensure compliance.


18th of January an independent combined report (Top local SA vet & local experienced Behaviourist.)


1. The current environment the dogs are in is detrimental to their health
2. Returning the dogs to their owner or allowing them to be rehomed will improve their wellbeing
3. None of the dog or pups inspected showed any sign of aggression, they were timid and shy, but this could be part due to their current environment
4. No reason was found to have the adult dogs or pups killed.
Notes from that report also stated:

a) From the notes........ I read on the front of the kennels, there has been no appropriate handling of these animals, in my opinion the dog are now much worse situation than the facilities they were taken from having view both.

b) In my opinion the RSPCA need to assess their own housing arrangements, because storing dogs on death row is unacceptable.

c) I have seen the initial report completed for the RSPCA by XXXXXX, and it would be an interesting read if the same report was prepared in the facilities, they are now in.


Mark Aldridge also was able to view the RSPCA facilities, noting they were not to current regulation and totally unacceptable for anything but very short-term care.

The Independent experts also noted the facilities were not suitable for long term care, quoting that the animals were in much better facilities before seizure.

The CEO of the RSPCA noted the same in 2018, stating “The problem is Lonsdale is too old now”. We cannot offer best practice animal care, and that, “At the end of the day, Pets are just so much better off, out in the community (CEO Paul Stevenson).

Mark after receiving the initial independent report and the two latest ones, wrote to the minister to investigate the matter, as it was 3 reports the dogs were fine to 1 report they were not. Advocating for the animals to be released into independent care, and from there to be rehomed, with the support of the experts and the owners.

Mark met with the Animal advisory committee on the recommendation of the Minister, and advocated for various changes, which were well received.

The courts regardless of the many reports in favour of releasing the animals, found in favour of signing them over to the RSPCA to do with them as they pleased, which was still to kill the border collies.

Mark then arranged further legal support to appeal that decision, to buy time for the animals, with a fabulous offer from a caring Barrister who was obviously an animal lover.

On the 7th of February Oscars law, opposed Marks work, and set to target Mark and those professionals helping him, citing they were supporters of puppy farms and posting incorrect photo and naming people not involved. (Oscars law work very closely with the RSPCA)

8th February 2019; The RSPCA’s response was to create a SECOND report to address that appeal.

Shortly after 3 independent reports were produced, showing in each case the animals could be rehomed, the RSPCA arranged the second report by the same people that wrote their first one, it was produced on 24/2/19.

The local council were also receiving pressure from Oscars law to close the facility, final inspections cleared the facility as being compliant

That report again, recommended each, and every adult Border Collie was killed, asap. Interesting the report showed the animals in most cases were worse than the condition when first seized. Same diagnosis but with addition potential for fear aggression” was quoted in the report.

A couple of the animals were supposedly better, but still “Humane euthanasia as soon as possible” was applied to every animal in this report.

In the RSPCA reports and court applications, Mark noticed they both wanted to seize all the animals at the facility and or have the courts demand the owners hand them over and that a majority of around 75% of the animals at the registered breeding facility were as damaged mentally as the ones seized. “The first report stated that the RSPCA would have seized more but did not have the ability on the day, and that “humane euthanasia of most of the animals may be the best option”

Mark Aldridge then worked with the Breeder to safe guard the many other animals yet to be seized, which resulted in the owner handing the animals over to him, so he could ensure they were taken in by the best no kill facilities he could find.

No applications by Mark went beyond trying to save the first 10 dogs seized and their pups and to ensure the safety of the remaining animals.

The owner agreed, so a total of around 80 dogs and pups were released to several top Australian shelters.

The Supreme court appeal failed, meaning the seized Border Collies were now owned by the state, in the control of the RSPCA who still wanted to kill them all. The RSPCA then became aware that the rest of the animals earmarked by their behaviorists to be seized and possibly killed, had been moved out of the breeding facilities.

One of the shelters who took on an amazing 37 dogs, started a petition to demand the RSPCA release the remaining dogs to them, seeing as it was beyond the RSPCA’s abilities to both house the animals adequately and rehabilitate them. Attracting near 100,000 signatures

Videos of the RSPCA assessments and some documentation was leaked onto the net, creating a major issue for the RSPCA, as experts from all over Australia were appalled at their assessment strategy, so they then produced media releases which were taken up word for word by many media outlets.

Making matters worse for the RSPCA, is that all the independent self-funded shelters were having great success with all the animals they had saved from their grip. Producing photos and videos clearly showing the animals were indeed mentally stable and rehomable.

This resulted in the RSPCA again publishing their position and refusing to back down in respect of killing the animals in their facilities, eventually deciding to announce they had only killed 4, which undermined all their court applications and their behaviorists reports.

The Rspca media reports quoted a variety of made up facts, and used irrelevant photos, quoted an owner who was not and animal numbers their own legal documents undermined, there was never 300.

News also became evident that the RSPCA had on-sold the many puppies born in their facilities by the dogs seized, on-selling them for $850 each, a total of up to 27 puppies, some of which the original reports had also labelled mentally damaged.

Regardless of any facts, all that matters are the innocent voiceless animals, all those that the RSPCA did not seize are now safe and loving their new homes.

Let’s hope there are many lessons to be learned, how regulated breeders operate, lowering how many animals are allowed at a regulated facility, better investment in social services for all animals and improved facilities and networks to ensure the safety of any animals seized under the legislation.

And with out any doubt, changes to the assessment regimes that labelled re-homable animals as only worthy of death.


Edited by asal
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

this could get interesting?


rspca nsw news feeds keep coming up on my facebook page.


so asked this question of one of their posts...





S Pity rspca failed the sa border collies so badly? killed them all as not rehomable.... all the ones the owner gave to the rescues had no trouble?
  • 0
    S interesting, the wa rescue group believe you sought and received permission to kill all ten? not just 4? I have seen videos of the pens and they were not only very new, clean and far larger than the pens you hve at your facility? are these videos fake?
  • 0
    correction you are rspca nsw. I meant rspca sa sought and received permission to kill all ten, not just the 4 they did kill.. have you seen the videos? I had no idea that now dogs can be seized on the basis of "chronic mental suffering" or that inspectors are trained to make such findings from video evidence like this one posted? many breeds and border collies are a breed, not crossbreds are described as being (in the case of Lhasa apso's 'chary of strangers" other breeds "wary" or "suspicious" of strangers, is this now to be a valid reason for a dog to now be seized and euthanised? is this now law or in the process of being passed into law that all dogs must respond in a friendly fashion to complete strangers entering their home or be seized and put down? Is it to become law that no breed has the right to be "chary" "wary" or "suspicious" of strangers now or it will be seized and the owner charged?......here is the video. .... somehow I suspect this entire question will now be wiped from this thread rather than being answered, or am I just being suspicious?............here is the video.... your take on what is seen would be appreciated... well if this is answered and not deleted.................https://www.facebook.com/Mark.M.Aldridge.Independent/videos/10157253729924124/
  • 0
    I noticed also that if that dog had long toenails her owner could have been charged with neglecting them, in this case the fact the inspector noted they are short is being given as cause of suspicion? so there is another cause for concern, trim their nails and it can be construed the dog is suffering mental issues, leave them long and the dog is suffering neglect, what is the safe length for a dogs toenails then? Also note all seen in that video are in good body condition and coats in good condition
Link to post
Share on other sites

pretty impressed.


wasn't deleted, not even the angry later poster. and received a reply of sorts...didnt answer my question is this comming to nsw though.


J P     S good luck with that. RSPCA ... PETA by another name (?) ... do not want to be transparent and are in no way dog / horse / cattle friendly and even less so to their owners.

Hell will have frozen over x 3 before they get another cent of mine.
RSPCA NSW Hi S, Please contact RSPCA South Australia if you have any questions in regards to the above case involving Border Collies. You can contact them here: https://www.rspcasa.org.au/contact/ and here: https://www.facebook.com/rspcasouthaustralia/
RSPCA NSW were not involved in this case (as it is out of our jurisdiction on New South Wales), so are unable to comment. Thanks.
S Thank you. Although I am concerned that this has set a precedent and "chronic mental suffering" may become used in nsw to describe any dog that is "chary, wary or suspicious" of strangers, as this is a characteristic of many of our purebred and a percentage of x bred dogs as well? Few people realise what great guard and family protection dogs poodles are, so they too could fall foul of this as well if it is to become legislated as a basis for seizure and prosecution, as I am aware new laws are currently being drafted?
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Interesting that rspca nsw chose not to answer my questions about what is a safe length of your dogs nails.


since too long can be seized and too short can be diagnosed as "chronic mental suffering" and seized as well under the well used reason "formed the opinion" by the seizing inspector.   


surely we as their owners really do need to know the answer to this question, otherwise how do we know what is necessary to know

 to keep our dogs safe from seizure.


Because this power to "form the opinion" and seized without warning is already law.


it has been since 1993, that is the year Marion Alcorn's ten arabians were seized the day the rspca inspector arrived.......in 1999 the day the inspector left the note on my back door and took my little chihuahua Stringy.   Then the same power used to remove the border collies in 2019


This POWER has been in existence for over 26 years, so few seem to be aware of this?



Was at Dogs NSW the other day and there was the great chart about interacting with a dog you have just met.


one of the ones that caught my eye in particular, was do not look a strange dog directly in the eye.


this interesting article explains very well.

Pity the RSPCA dont teach their inspectors. or do magistrates know this important information either or they would not have succeeding in getting the court order  to kill those ten border collies, let alone used their flawed reasoning to seize them in the first place.





Edited by asal
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Any updates about the fate of the last  six dogs they had not killed because of the uproar over the killing of the first batch of four ?


So hoping they ended up giving them to one of the rescues who proved so well they could successfully re-homed their kennel mates.

Edited by asal
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
  • Create New...