Blog

Pets Paradise In Disarray Over Donations

On February 2, 2011, in puppyfarms, transparency, by Mike Bailey
0

Pets Paradise stores in Victoria found themselves with a bit of a problem last Christmas. Head office required them to hold a “Giving Tree” promotion where they encouraged customers to buy items (at full price of course) to be donated to homeless dogs and cats. What they didn’t count on was Victorian shelters and rescue refusing to be associated with the pet store chain because of their perceived association with puppy factories.

The RSPCA has received numerous communications from the community that some Pets Paradise stores are fundraising on our behalf this festive season.  We would like to alert the public that we have not received any donations from any Pets Paradise store, and have actively contacted Pets Paradise head office to alert its store managers that we wish for them to cease using our brand to secure donations from the public.

The RSPCA is in no way associated with Pets Paradise and will not be accepting any donations from pet shops.

http://www.rspcavic.org/campaigns_news/latest_news.htm

This is where things get tricky.  The following email from Pets Paradise Head Office was posted on SavingPets Blog today. Out of 19 Victorian stores, only 9 are listed and a few phone calls revealed that the recipients listed are not correct for five of these. We’re waiting to hear back from the rest.

From: (prh.net.au)
Subject: Christmas Gift Tree Appeal

Please see attached for a list of charities that gratefully accepted donations from our Christmas Gift Tree Appeal last year.

Kind regards,

STORE – ORGANISATION
Roselands – Sydney Dog’s Home
Rouse Hill – Paws and Hooves
Parramatta – Animal Welfare League
Mt Druitt – Hawks Repound
Macarthur Square – Campbelltown Pound
Lakehaven – Hunter Animal Shelter
Blacktown – Blacktown Animal Holding Facility
Toombul – Peninsula Animal Aid in Redcliff
Redbank – Peninsula Animal Aid
Mt Ommaney – Animal Welfare League in Ipswich
Browns Plains – QLD Animal Welfare League
Parkmore – Pets and Paws On phoning the store we were told “Paws to Help”
Southland – Guide Dogs On phoning the store we were told Village Vet & Cat Protection Society
Rosebud – Hastings Pound
Knox City – Pets and Paws On phoning the store we were told Guide Dogs
Corio – Pets and Paws Who are “Pets and Paws”? Has anyone heard of them?
Tea Tree Plaza – Geelong Animal Welfare
Myer Centre – Guide Dogs S.A
Marion – Guide Dogs S.A
Bondi Boutique – Blind Dogs S.A
Bondi Junction – Sydney Animal Shelter
Penrith – Sydney Animal Shelter
Hornsby – Renbury Farm Animal Shelter
Hurstville – Sydney Animal Shelter
Strathpine – Animal Welfare League
Helensvale – Animal Welfare League
Carindale – Animal Welfare League
Karingal – RSPCA Peninsula animal aid in pearcedale RSPCA Vic made clear pet stores are not to collect on their behalf
Greensborough – Cat Protection Society in Greensborough
Epping – RSPCA RSPCA Vic made clear pet stores are not to collect on their behalf
Inglefarm – RSPCA
Colonnades – Guide Dogs S.A
Rockingham – Rockingham Dog Pound
Midland Gate – S.A.F.E saving animals from Euthanasia

 

Dogs For Sale in Perth

On January 11, 2011, in adoption, by Mike Bailey
2

The title of this post refers to one of the new websites I setup last month. Dogs for sale in Perth lists only rescue dogs but targets people who haven’t already decided to adopt.

Three common ways a dog leaves an Australian pound or shelter (approx rates based on Victorian data):

  1. Reclaimed by owner (~50%)
  2. Adopted by a new owner (~25%)
  3. Killed by pound/shelter (~25%)

At present we aren’t doing a great job of finding new homes for dogs. Claims that there are too many dogs being bred are baseless. Australians owned 3.41 million dogs in 2009 and the reality is that with an average lifespan of 10 years we need almost 1000 dogs a day just to maintain a stable population. We need to do a better job of finding new homes for these dogs.

An important part of increasing adoptions is outreach. Rather than preaching to the choir we need to find people looking to bring a new pet into their lives who may not have considered adoption. Some people have misconceptions about rescue dogs all being damaged. Some think they want a puppy. Others just don’t know where to look. We can inform them but first we have to find them. Fortunately the Internet makes that easier than it’s ever been before.

It’s unusual to see the term dogs for sale applied to shelter dogs but this is what many people looking to buy a dog type into search engines. Until recently these sorts of searches have only been bringing up breeders and online classified. Dogs for sale in Perth is designed to direct people to Perth shelters and rescue groups. The same principle has been applied to Dogs for sale in Melbourne, Dogs Tasmania, Dogs for sale in Geelong, and Dogs Canberra. The sites show images of available dogs (like the one below) that link through to the adoption pages for the shelter or rescue group.

Dogs Refuge Home, Perth

If we want to improve things for our dogs for sale we need to be creative, positive and innovative. You can help us improve our ranking in search engines by linking to Dogs for sale in Perth, Dogs for Sale in Geelong and Dogs for sale in Melbourne.

 

 

Victorian Pounds Allowed To Release Animals To Rescuers

On December 14, 2010, in Victoria, by Mike Bailey
0

Someone who fosters a dog or cat in their home is no more an animal shelter than someone who fosters a child is an orphanage. Victorian Pounds have received clarification from the DPI that they can release animals to rescue groups who do not run an animal shelter. We’re happy to see reason prevail here.

Use of s.84Y written agreements by Councils to rehouse dogs and cats
The Domestic Animals Act 1994 (Act) provides Council under S.84Y with an ability to enter
into written agreements with any person or body to sell or dispose of dogs and cats seized or
surrendered to Council under the Act. Concerns have been raised since the issue of Council
Bulletin 43 that Councils may believe that they are not permitted to enter into these
agreements with people who are not registered as animal shelters.
Council has the power under S.84Y of the Act to enter into a written agreement with any
person or body, whether they are registered as an animal shelter or not, as long as the Council
provides in the agreement that the person or body comply with the statutory obligations that
the Council must adhere to under the Act and Code of Practice.
When a Council seizes a dog or cat under the Act, the Council must abide by the following
provisions:
  • S.84O(3) – If the owner fails to recover a dog or cat seized under the Act, the Council can only sell or destroy the animal;
  • Code – Council must assess if the dog or cat is appropriate on health and temperament grounds to sell back into the community;
  • S.84U – Council must de-sex a dog or cat that they propose to sell;
  • S.12A – Council must implant a microchip into a dog or cat prior to selling;
  • Code – Council must vaccinate and worm a dog or cat prior to selling (all vaccinated animals must be held in quarantine for 8 days before sale).
Council could enter into a written agreement with any animal shelter, rescue group, foster
carer or individual person as long as they meet the obligations of Council cited above, before
the animal is sold, or given for a zero price, to a new owner. Council should construct the
written agreement to ensure that the person or group understands and commits to these
obligations. Council is responsible to monitor that such an agreement is complied with.
With regard to animals surrendered to Councils by their owners, these could also be provided
through the S.84Y agreements at the discretion of the Council, as it owns the animals.
This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that
the publication is without flaw or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all
liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this
publication.
Private ownership and foster care arrangements that keep small numbers of animals by a
person in their private residential accommodation, as pet dogs or cats would be, does not
constitute an animal shelter. The numbers of animals on such premises must comply with
Council planning provisions for pet animals and protection of their welfare is underpinned by
the welfare codes for dogs and cats and the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals Act 1986.
But where a premises sets up with facilities in which animals are kept and maintained by
staff specifically for shelter and rehousing, for example organisations such as Lost Dogs
Home, RSPCA, Lort Smith Animal Hospital and Cat Protection Society, then these
establishments must be registered in view of the numbers of animals being kept, processed
and held on site for sale. Councils were encouraged in Council Bulletin 43 to ensure that
such animal shelters receiving animals from them are registered with the Council in which
they were operating.
 

Dogs Killed Earlier for “Showing Fear”

On November 8, 2010, in Domestic Animals Amendment, Victoria, by Mike Bailey
3

The Victorian Government thinks they can reduce dog attacks by selectively killing lost dogs before their owners have time to collect them.

Victorian councils are required to hold lost dogs for 8 days to give owners a chance to collect them. As of 1st Sep 2010, councils can kill impounded dogs after 48 hours if:

  • the dog was ‘at large’
  • the owner cannot be identified
  • they ‘reasonably believe’ that the dog is likely to attack a person or animal in future if it were ‘at large’ again

I’ve written at length about why this is a bad idea but I’ll just received the Practice Note (download here) advising Councils how to establish ‘reasonable belief’.

This document shows an inexcusable level of ignorance about dog behaviour. I have trouble believing an adult was paid money to prepare it. Just look at the list of suggested reasons for killing dogs before the 8 days:

I think this is one of the easiest articles I’ve ever had to write as the author of this Practice Note says it all for me! Who wrote this and how did such bad advice get approved by the Minister?

 
Minister Responsible for Victoria's Companion Animal Laws

Stopping The Clock

On November 7, 2010, in transparency, Victoria, by Mike Bailey
0

Joe Helper Ignored Me :(

Victoria is the only state to set a maximum time an animal selected for sale can be held by a shelter. Our shelters oppose the ‘28 Day Rule‘ because it doesn’t take the circumstances of each individual animal into account. It results in the unnecessary destruction of cats and dogs who they would otherwise find homes for.

The Minister for Agriculture, Joe Helper,  has the final say over changes to the Code of Practice so I wrote to him a letter asking that this unprecedented and unwarranted rule be removed. No response. I followed up by email. Still no response.

Joe Helper Ignores a Lot of People :|

I felt a bit better to hear I wasn’t the only one being ignored.

In Victoria, a similar situation exists with all animal welfare issues being referred to the Premier for his decision, thus by-passing the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AWAC) which was established to provide community advice on the welfare of animals to the government.

The members of the AWAC are all highly motivated, talented professionals, yet the achievements of the committee remain negligible because the committee agenda and all debate are firmly controlled by the department.

Hey Joe, Ignore This :-)

A couple of weeks ago I decided to go public with this and was amazed at the response! In just two days every Melbourne shelter got behind the campaign and within a week it had over 2500 supporters. In it’s second week we’ve had radio and press interviews. The story in the Geelong Advertiser story generated a lot of interest.

StopTheClock Campaign Calls for End to '28 Day Rule'

Our politicians need to realise that not only do we see our own cats and dogs as family members, but our care also extends to animals we don’t personally own. We need to stand up and make our voices heard about these issues. As taxpayers we should expect our public servants to listen.

 
« Previous Entries Next Entries »