RSPCA Archives | Lawyers for Companion Animals https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/tag/rspca/ Animal Lawyer of Australia Sun, 11 Nov 2018 07:37:41 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0 https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/cropped-flavicon-32x32.png RSPCA Archives | Lawyers for Companion Animals https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/tag/rspca/ 32 32 RSPCA cops a serve over two dead dogs https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/rspca-cops-a-serve-over-two-dead-dogs/ Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:00:24 +0000 http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1205 South Coast Register

A CLAIM by the Nowra RSPCA that two dogs in its care had found homes when in fact they had been put down has upset animal advocates.

On the RSPCA Nowra Facebook page a photo was posted of a group of people with six dogs on July 29.

At least two of those dogs had been euthanased by the RSPCA, bringing into doubt the organisation’s claims of the number of animals it adopts out.

The Facebook issue was raised by Tony Twining, a volunteer with the Nowra branch of the RSPCA shelter between February and May this year.

Mr Twining said the two dogs that he knew about, Reg and Max, had been put down in May.

“When the RSPCA published this on Facebook saying these dogs had found their forever homes they knew those two dogs were dead,” Mr Twining said.

“I’m upset that I’m in that photo, it’s quite offensive, I feel like I’m complicit in that lie.

“I am also concerned that it is still on their Facebook page.

“RSPCA NSW CEO Steve Coleman claims to have investigated the issue but the page is still there,” Mr Twining said.

The Register contacted Mr Coleman who confirmed that photo did appear on the RSPCA Facebook page but believed it had been taken down.

“I understand where he [Mr Twining] was coming from,” he said.

“He’s obviously annoyed we’ve misled people. Some days later one of those dogs had been euthanased. It was never the intent to mislead or misrepresent anything at the time when that photo and caption went up.

“We’re an organisation that isn’t perfect and is striving to do better, but the energy needs to be channelled into reducing the number of animals brought to us,” Mr Coleman said.

Lawyers for Companion Animals principal Anne Greenaway is an animal welfare campaigner who believes the organisation is more concerned with making money than animal welfare.

“This is not the first report I am aware of that the NSW RSPCA has stated that an animal has found a home when in fact the animal has been killed,” Ms Greenaway said.

“RSPCA counselled Tony Twining on his comments on a Facebook page, yet they did not and still have not removed their false comments on that same Facebook page, despite being fully aware that the comments were false.”

 

Add New Comment

Showing 50 of 50 comments

    • Donna Hharker

      Terrible to think they ring people up and make them aware when their surrender animal has been rehomed… who knows how many people are happy to know their once loved pet is with another loving family when really the animal has been euthanized!!

    • This is just another example of the RSPCA being more concerned about its image and bank balance than the animals it professes to care about. Mr Coleman, what *are* you doing to try to reduce the number of animals brought to you? Wide-spread free desexing would be a good place to start, wouldn’t it?

    • Jane Fisher

      I will never ever donate money to the RSPCA, they don’t do the right thing a lot of the time and still they get funding of millions of dollars. My hard earned money will be going to small no kill shelters who have to do all their wn fund raising with no help from the government. Check out Facebook, there are any amount of them, mostly run by volunteers who are real animal lovers.

    • Bellahoudini

      A campaign to encourage donations to your local rescue groups who scour the pounds for cats and dogs that can be rehomed instead of the RSPCA perhaps.

    • Bellahoudini

      This is unacceptable. Thankyou Tony for standing up and alerting us to this behavior. And thankyou to all the people from the staff who care to the people who rescue and foster. And to put it nicely may the fleas of a thousand unwanted dogs and cats infest the underwear of all those who dont love and take care of animals they are responsible for. Get your act together RSPCA!

  • Pogo

    “1. Animals have an intrinsic value of their own and, accordingly, must be considered to possess the right to live in a way which enables them to have a positive life and to develop and enjoy their inherent qualities.” This is the first paragraph of their own charter. The kill rate they employ and the standards in use at the moment make it very easy for them to euthanaise and dispose of animals who would be taking up funds that may be better self serving to some Executive. Their CEO Steve Coleman always has a well rehearsed spin response whenever their misdeeds are exposed, which he repeats ad nauseum. The Inspectorate and other Executive moved from Yagoona some time ago, where rents were nil to the Olympic Complex where according to recent Annual Reports the costs are in excess of half million dollars p.a. Then we have 2 of the past Presidents who undertake prosecutions on their own behalf. The amounts of money going to their own firms is staggering. One case alone, a single 70+ lady in the central west of NSW, in the middle of the drought has been billed in excess of $450000.00 for ‘legal costs” – payable to them of course. There are far more excesses on record about the actions of certain parties at the very top.To raise some of these actions, results in immediate threat of massive court actions, paid for by – yep, you guessed it – out of cupcake drives, million paws walks, branch fund raising etc. Take a look at their current web site. Many ways to donate, very few on the help they offer. The sooner certain carpet bagger style persons are removed the sooner the Society will return to their old and intrinsic values.

  • Helen

    To dispel a couple of misconceptions/myths: the RSPCA does NOT OWN the Nowra shelter, the Council does. This means that the RSPCA is limited in what it can and cannot put in – only ‘things’ which can be taken if they fail to win the contract when it comes up for renewal. The RSPCA Nowra Branch is NOT the shelter – the Branch pays for items for the shelter. Some shelters are owned by the RSPCA, but not the Shoalhaven – those owned by the RSPCA are not limited in what they can have, the Shoalhaven shelter is. Take note Adam Wright – as a ‘reporter’ you should be doing your homework prior to writing inflammatory articles (I think it’s termed ‘getting both sides of the story’).

    I have no idea what RSPCA NSW does with all the money it receives – apart from updating the Yagoona shelter (which needed it badly) and paying the inspectors (who put up with a lot of crap [although one inspector deserves what s/he gets] from the public when doing their job (with limited resources) and the education section (may go to schools, etc, to educate only when a request has been put to the various RSPCA education teams). Don’t beat the inspectors, NSW is a large State (much, much larger than the ACT, and the inspectors have so much more territory to cover. Animals are given ‘extension of life’ (to put it crudely) by being sent to other shelters around the State to better their chances. Nowra Shelter is small, it cannot hold all the animals it receives (nor has the funds to do so), and if no other shelter is willing to take an animal, unfortunately … . Blame the Council if you wish to divvy blame – there is no maximum to the number of animals on a property, suburbia or country; there is no law against back yard breeders, either! Wandering animals and strays are, by law, to go the Shelter.

    Charging for animals at the shelter: duh! Do people honestly think the shelters should just give away animals that have not been ‘fixed’ so the back yard breeders and those who mistreat animals (prevalent in the Shoalhaven) can continue to contribute to the misery of animals? They are no doubt acquiring animals from the newspaper which are being given away for some reason or other, as it is! The costs are for the microchipping, vaccinations, any medical treatment the animal enters the pound (flea treatment, deworming), etc. What do you want, people? Freebies? Don’t mistake the shelters for the head office of RSPCA: the individual shelters still have to raise their own funds; the head office divvies funds between all the shelters on an ‘as needed’ basis (or so it appears).

    Bequests and wills: let’s just say ‘BullS()^’ to such scaremongering comments. Do a bit of research before making such comments, please. It’s fantastic that people are making comments against euthanasia and wastage of funds, but it is NOT the RSPCA as a whole, so don’t mislead other readers with your comments. Don’t subject all RSPCA folk with cranky, vitriolic (albeit heartfelt!) comments of condemnation and damnation. Reserve them for the deserving!

    I would love the Australian Government (and local Council) to get their acts together and bring in an ASPCA (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) AND animal specific poisons centre (which the US also has, by the way) style of laws and regulations, but they won’t (as opposed to can’t – similar to the live export trade where it is also a matter of won’t, not can’t).

    I totally agree with many comments here, in spite of being a contributor to and member of the local RSPCA branch, but don’t bite all of us, please. There are some duds, but there are also many of us who are genuine in their attempts to change things for the better. It is, however, up to local Councils and the Australian Government (whoever is in – no presiding Government has had the gumption to change laws re animal welfare (live exports a prime example, as are back yard breeders and animal farmers). It is the magistrates and judges who give lenient sentences, if any!, and fines to perpretrators – leaving the RSPCA way out of pocket in expenses. Go after them, not the inspectors or the RSPCA.

    In leaving: I have also had ‘words’ with the powers that be over animal welfare issues (RSPCA, Council, local members); feel free to write also, don’t just voice you disapproval in a comments section – that will NOT get action!

  • Vonnie

    RSPCA NSW has the highest euthanasia rate of any state and we know why. They have such blatant disregard for the animals in their care and would prefer to kill them than work with reputable rescue groups. Steve Coleman wont name them and interestingly no one has come forward… More lies ?? it will only be when the donations start drying up that they will pay attention. Exploiting animals for a photo opportunity and and a bit of PR to fool people into giving donations and then killing them several days later is just vile. Only RPSCA ACT tries to save them and the rest ride on their success.

  • Paul Archer

    The RSPCA NSW should be the subject of a public investigation into how it uses it’s money and resources and why, given those resources that it clearly has, why it’s rehoming rates are so low compared to best practice animal shelters around the world. Also RSPCA should be stripped of its animal cruelty mandate as it clearly cannot do both well – animal cruelty prosecution AND animal shelters. One or the other , but not both

  • Kanelli

    How low can you go…to use the animals for fundraising before killing and to lie. Can’t use ‘didn’t pass the behavioural test’ excuse here, as these dogs were trusted enough to be with the general public.

    I use to be a foster carer for RSPCA Yagoona. My last two foster Mum cats would have been euthanased as they were not coping at the Shelter. A friend was good enough to adopt one for half price … has they had 1/2 price promotions at the time. With the other, I adopted, the RSPCA knew I only adopted to save but they still charged me full price for the adoption. A pensioner who was a foster carer had to pay full price for a cat she didn’t want, to save from being put down…despite the fact she was a long term fundraiser for them…once again how low can you go?

    I had a litter of kittens … two didn’t find homes immediately so became sick with the flu at the Shelter. A RSPCA Vet phoned me to foster the kittens again, or they would be euthanased. This is after I had already treated the kittens for flu and ringworm before. What if I had gone on holidays during that time? I now wonder whether they would have been truthful to me about killing and about the others I have fostered. How can one trust the RSPCA?

  • “The energy needs to be channelled into reducing the number of animals brought ” says Steve Coleman. I think that the RSPCA are in the ideal situation–because they are a well-known organisation , financially it is affordable for them-and because they have a voice that the government hears –to do something about de-sexing of companion animals–and making it affordable for those sectors of our community who cannot afford de-sexing at a vet.How about mobile de- sexing vans that can travel to the places where this is so needed. Nor do I accept that this is the problem. I strongly disagree with you Steve Coleman. When Nathan Winograd worked with shelters in the USA he found that No Kill was not only possible –but achievable. He worked with the public in the areas where the shelters were and he found that overwhelmingly local people wanted to help re-home animals. He proved this in 3 very different parts of the USA. The RSPCA should try it–instead of killing so many animals who have the mis-fortune to end up in an RSPCA shelter. The Australian public are not going to stand by and watch so many precious animals be killed. Stand up and be counted Steve Coleman

  • CompassionKat

    “He’s obviously annoyed we’ve misled people” wow…I thought Mr. Coleman was adept at misleading people. I know I was misled about the RSPCA until I heard about their massive kill-rates, their $40 million hefty share and investment portfolio, and their $10 million profit last year, all accumulated at the expense of the healthy dogs and cats ruthlessly killed by this so-called animal welfare organisation. Now I hear about this latest pathetic incident. What a sad and offensive way to hoodwink the community.

  • Simone

    God, how disgusting you have become RSPCA, you might as well become a serial killer for animals, you dont care for them your all bloody money hungry, SHAME SHAME ON YOU…. I am no longer donating to your pockets..

  • Vonnie

    Unacceptable RSPCA !!! What else are you lying about ? Your euthanasia stats are disgraceful and you are taking donations to save animals on false pretences. You will be held accountable for misleading the public make no mistake. Enough is enough .

  • Connie

    How many times can the RSPCA do this BEFORE something is done??? Oh I forgot THEY are the only ones who can make a valid complaint to the court!!

  • Gayl deveney

    How long is the RSPCA going to get away with all the lies and killing of healthy animals?? It has gone on for long enough, too many animals have been killed for no reason!! It’s about time the RSPCA were held accountable for the disgusting happenings within their network!!

  • thaddeas

    Used to attend million paws walk, hold a regular stall and donate our takings to the RSPCA, but not now. The RSPCA has gone over to the dark side. Instead of being an organisation which educates and persuades people, it has become part of the modern day state apparatus. Like DOCS, it now knocks on your door and demands to see your pet. Next we will see manditory notifications for allegedly abused pets. I stopped supporting the RSPCA when they started acting like the Gestapo. Going out to people’s homes without permission; jumping fences when the owner isn’t at home. Claiming they know best when you should see the way they treat animals in their care at the Nowra pound. No the RSPCA has lost its way. More interested in reality TV shows and playing to the media than in their sacred duty to help animals

  • Susan

    ‘He’s obviously annoyed we’ve misled people” I think you’re onto it, Steve Coleman.
    Quite a lot of us are, obviously, very annoyed.

  • Robyn.

    the RSPCA runs the Nowra pound ( along with many other ones ) & they charge people $100 to surrender an animal with them & if you go there to adopt a dog they charge $320.Even if the animal that is surrendered has already been desexed they still get $320 for the dog.I just have to wonder where all the money goes???Mr Coleman said they need to work on not getting so many animals surrendered….well perhaps with all their profits they are making they could offer people a reduction in the cost of desexing dogs or cats.To me that would make better sense than having all that money in a bank account.It would be like investing in the future for the betterment of animals.Sorry but I have lost faith in the RSPCA

  • What on earth is this??!!!!,..RSPCA are you just a money making business?.I thought so…I bet you have nice homes, money, holidays and those like me, millions of fellow contributors and advocates don’t have enough food to eat every day because we send it to you, so our beloved animals are saved, not KILLED. How many more have you been killing!?. The money you get and other KILL shelters get is to keep your business going, is that it?.Thats what it is, just business for you all. I believe you have stopped caring for animals, and this is not first time that a killing of an animal in your care had happened.Someone must look into the way RSPCA and KILL SHELTERS run their so-called businesses and find where the money really does go.

    It is time to get rid of organisations who take money and do with it as they please. The money is to SAVE animals not KILL them. Be rid of councils and institutions that KILL, period..It is 2012 and the time is now. People are not stupid!.You had your way, and in the past have excused your actions and today are still doing the same thing, but what you need to truly realise, is that these excuses are costing innocent beatuful lives of these animals. People will not accept the killings. What is needed now, is to have a thorough investigation and consequences need to be issued. People need to pay for these cruel and uncessessary mistakes. Millions have been given to you and many other places and there was always an enormous amounts of donations and advocates contributing to the cause to actually save lives. I feel sick to think being a fellow advocate and regular contributor to bear witness to these actions. You would had been better to invested in the prevention of all KILL Shelters, which we have and DO NOT want! and save ANIMALS than what you’ve been doing.

    I pity you and places like yours. I pitty you all.

  • Naomi

    Not good enough!

  • Mumzy

    They should watch Animal Planet. The shows on there about the different ASPC’S in America show how it really should be here in Australia. These officers really care about the animals and don’t worry about the money. l don’t donate to them anymore either. l prefer to donate to Pets Haven in Victoria as they do a fantastic job with the animals.

  • Sue Seiver

    RSPCA you are disgusting. You are nothing but lying, money hungry people who dont give a damn about the animals Welfare. I will continue to tell everyone i know, how pathetic you really are. Rescue groups do the Real wonders with rehabilitating and rehoming animals, you are just a big joke. You have all the funding you need to help so many animals, yet, you continue to let them all down, time and time again. The public trust you- but rest assured, this is about to change!

  • whyme

    how do we know that the animals didnt develop a illness suddenly when they were meant to be adopted- wont be a first nor last time that has occured- how many pet shop pets look healthy then are violently ill not long later? you cant blame the staff at these shelters for things out of their control. Nowra shelter is doing a great job at rehoming and transfering animals to try to find them homes – shame other shelters cant say the same – Perhaps people should try working where these staff do rather than sittingin their high horse- it is a horrible jo at times and they have to switch off or send themselves mad with the work they do. all good for you bleeding earts who want to help.

  • Whyme in reply to your post
    “how do we know that the animals didn’t develop a illness suddenly when they were meant to be adopted”
    we know because the RSPCA have a kill rate of just under 50% and if these dogs had died of an illness as you suggest then you can bet your life that the RSPCA spin would have had sad pics of them all over the media asking for donations for them.
    And please don’t lecture us on what a hard job they have-what the hell do you think most of us do?, thats right we scramble around to try and save animals before the RSPCA gets their hands on them and we save and rehome more then the NSW RSPCA.
    So yes, these dogs did die from an illness, its an illness called self interest and greed.
    Agree it must be a horrible job at times, thank goodness that most of us are non kill or very low kill.
    .

  • whyme

    well you clearly are tarring all shelters with same brush. I have no doubt some have terrible records BUT i DO know that nowra shleter has had a massive change in thinking and rehoming – unlike a few years ago they now do as much as possible. unfortunatley cost is prohbitive and i dont think anyone can save ‘no/low kill’ if they are realsitic. I persoannly have seen many dogs that should not of been rehomed for aggressive/behaviour issues that endanger other animals and people- yet they bend over backward to help as best they can but many should never be rehomed . Shame more people dont take into account the people who have to pick up the pieces of these dogs taht are rehomed that shouldnt be

  • whyme-we are so tied of that rubbish “unfortunatley cost is prohbitive” what a load of rubbish, NSW RSPCA made a profit last year of nearly $10 million- rescue groups have shown how it can be done and they dont get paid a cent! .
    Again if the RSPCA cant do the job-get out of the bloody way and let us in.

    (Edited by a moderator)

  • Anne Greenaway

    This is not about the animals suddenly getting sick. This is about KNOWINGLY lying on Facebook and failing to correct the record. The CEO was written to about this issue yet the lie remained on Facebook until media got involved.

  • Anne Greenaway

    My question to Steve Coleman is why has the Nowra RSPCA now taken down the Facebook photo and lies that were told. Surely the decent thing to do would be to CORRECT THE RECORD and tell the truth, rather than just remove the photo as if these lies never occurred.

    It is most regrettable that there is no OMBUDSMAN for the RSPCA. If there was, I have no doubt this office would be inundated with complaints.

    “He’s obviously annoyed we’ve misled people.”

    Yes Steve, many people are upset and annoyed, not just the brave Tony Twinning who came forward in this matter, after writing a detailed letter to yourself on 4 September 2012.

    Animal lovers are sick to death of the lies and spin.

    Please expect more adverse media stories, while RSPCA NSW continues to lie and continues to reject NO KILL strategies which have been proven to save lives.

  • Profit

    Wow, such passion from the commentry. Managing pet over population is a huge issue and the focus doesnt seem to be on cause but on the outputs, more unwanted pets being dumped). Is it our wonderful NSW laws that actively restrict responsible pet ownership by hiking up the costs to actually own a dog? (its not an Act about cats at all!) And then theres all the ‘pet-ty politics’ between the wonderful people involved in animal rescue. Wonder what that task force thingy is going to tell us about dogs in society? no doubt more revenue raising ways to restrict having and enjoying dogs.

  • Kath

    RSPCA is an absolute disgrace. When will they be accountable for their actions? When will the animals in their care become a priority??

  • Michelle

    More RSPCA lies, no surprises there. Imagine how many more we don’t know about. I have an RSPCA T-shirt that I won’t wear because it would be supporting them. Time to get out the marking pen, adjust the shirt and let people know the truth. I say a royal commission into the Royal Society!

  • Su

    RSPCA saying ‘dog has found a new home’ sounds very much like that old story told to children that their pet has gone to live on a lovely big farm where they can run free and chase rabbits but they can never go to visit them…..

  • No longer fooled

    It is time to take away the RSPCA’s business licence and non profit status and shut their facilities and prosecute those responsible for fraud and cruelty to animals. Simple.

  • Thats just plain wrong….on two counts. To put down dogs who have helped them out in the field is bad enough, obviously all with great temperaments, fit, healthy and above all adoptable, but to suggest that they found homes when in fact the RSPCA murdered them for more room, is misleading …I find this all very sad especially as I do own an RSPCA dog myself.

  • Julie

    Where is the accountability? Receiving millions in donations and government grants and still killing healthy rehomable dogs. This should be one for ICAC….not good enough RSPCA…RIP poor dogs

  • Profit

    Geez Kath, take a breath. Been burn’t by the RSPCA eh? Leave the hate and concentrate on solving the ‘problem’ of dogs and our society.

  • We want the truth

    Problem is the organisation is not accountable nor transparent. Question is; is their main reason for existence to pull in donations thereby ensuring jobs? Just because this charity appears to be there for animals doesnt mean their actions underpin their appearance. And it doesnt mean that all those employed actually give a toss about animals either.
    Please dont think this problem is isolated to NSW. Tasmania and Western Australia operations are I understand just as dodgy. Cases not prosecuted when the evidence is strong enough for a prosecution, information to members about vet attention supposedly given to animals which appears to be quite misleading…and on it goes.

  • Bella

    I believe there is a new CEO of RSPCA WA who is wanting to change things for the better for those animals that go into its care. If what I read is correct and my memory is right she is from the UK and couldnt understand why the kill rate was so high and hopes to introduce how it is operated in the UK, where things have improved greatly for some time.

  • Karen Camilleri

    How utterly pathetic heartless and unacceptable. falsley raising revenue and always receiving donations and support from the public, government funded and killing off so many healthy rehomable animals.
    what sort of message does this action send out to the public. heartless murderers.
    I used to donate and support RSPCA but since working in rescue personally have learnt the dirty back door tactics of the rspca and the underhanded lies and misconceptions they put out. more funds and support thanany other animal organisation and still senslessy murdering innocent rehomable pets. im disgusted and saddened

  • RSPCA refuse to work with other rescue groups to help reduce the numbers in thier care. What a load of rubbish from the money spinners!

  • I think RSPCA needs investigating. People donate money thinking it will be used towards helping animals….THIS IS NOT THE CASE obviously:( I am just so disgusted and angry that the people are being deceived over and over. I will NEVER donate to RSPCA ever again. Also I live in regional NSW and the RSPCA has NO interest in helping any animals at risk out here.

  • Another dirty little secret exposed of a multi million dollar organization who not only failed these poor dogs but continues to fail in so many other ways. The media spin is finally being questioned by the very people who have for so long been the true voice of animal welfare-The rescuers.

  • Kate Sidonie

    Steve Coleman, says “…we are an organisation striving to do better” The RSPCA is certainly striving to do better in terms of its wealthy share and investments, and the profits it makes, $10 million last year. Sadly, the kill rate for dogs and cats is 50% doesn’t seem to be much striving to save, and rehome the animals in their care. All the companion animals in their dubious “care” could be saved if Mr. Coleman was as sincere about animal welfare, as he is about accumulating profits.

  • Disgusted

    I used to help the RSPCA but NO MORE! I think the organisation stinks they do not care for animal welfare at all. Look at how much money is raised by them. All monies just go into investments and not into saving dogs, plus their temperament testing is outrageous! Where is the skill?? All my dogs I saved (I have 3 dogs) were saved from a local pound and if they had gone into the RSPCA wouldn’t have stood a chance. They are now well behaved, loving and well loved dogs. It takes time with some dogs to bring them around, after all if you were lost, abused or starved, and fearful of your life wouldn’t you be nervous and timid and if you were hungry, wouldn’t you try to keep your food and not let someone take it away.

    This organisation needs to wake up to itself. It needs investigating URGENTLY.

    I run a business and so do many of friends all animals lovers. No funds will ever go RSPCA way again!

  • I find this very disturbing. If that picture wasn’t meant to mislead anyone…why say the dogs had found a home..after they were already dead. I can see donations dropping off after this.

  • Bramblewood

    Another day; another RSPCA coverup. How long will this be allowed to continue?
    Wake up people of NSW – our taxes are subsidising the killing of perfectly healthy, rehomable animals. Other organisations have save statistics ten times higher than the RSPCA branches in the same areas. Literally – ten times higher!
    And for those well meaning people who donate to the RSPCA or leave bequests in their wills – rest assured, it is far more likely that your gift will be used to buy the drugs used to kill animals than it is that it will be used to save them.
    Shame RSPCA shame. No wonder Mr Coleman chooses to communicate through 20 second soundbites rather than participate in a debate. Big thumbs down.

  • Tee Kay

    I do not understand the mentality of the RSPCA in this matter.

    Surely by saying that 2 out of the 6 dogs had to be put down because they were unable to re-home them would be a better approach as it could be the catalyst for more people to become involved with adopting unwanted pets.

    If people see that they have a 100% success rate then they may not become involved due to thinking it is all under control.

  • I think it is disgusting that the RSPCA has mislead the good natured and generous people who donate to them, by using these dogs for fundraising, then kill them afterwards. Given the RSPCA made around $10 million profit last year, has something like around $40 million invested in shares & investments, got a $7.5 million grant from the state government, plus millions in donations, it’s high time that the RSPCA were held accountable for their actions.
    This event, the killing of these two dogs, is just the latest in a series of issues involving the RSPCA. Why do they have such a high kill rate for companion animals exceeding 50% when local community groups, working with council run pounds, can achieve far better? Why can pounds throughout the Central Coast and Hunter Valley regions get kill rates between 4% and 12%, whilst the RSPCA can’t get near it? Why won’t the RSPCA work with community based rescue groups? Why does the RSPCA have a behavioural test which kills far more than it saves? Why can the RSPCA branch in the ACT gain a kill rate of only 6.5% yet the NSW branch can’t?
    What is the RSPCA NSW doing with all the money they get? Does it go into saving the lives of the animals in their care or into their investment portfolio? Clearly the money raised didn’t go towards the saving of these two poor dogs.

  • And STILL the RSPCA lies continue!!!!!!!!!!!

 

http://www.southcoastregister.com.au/story/572739/rspca-cops-a-serve-over-two-dead-dogs/

]]> The bloody truth about live export https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/the-bloody-truth-about-live-export/ Sat, 08 Dec 2012 23:37:39 +0000 http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1198 By ANNE GREENAWAY

 

IN MAY 2011, Four Corners’, A Bloody Business, opened the collective eyes of the Australian public to the horrific way in which Australian cattle ended their lives in Indonesian abattoirs.

These horrific and brutal acts epitomise the cruelty associated with the live export trade.

Australians watched – shocked and distressed as footage of animals’ eyes being gouged, tails being broken and cattle being hit and kicked streamed into Australian living rooms.

Viewers witnessed cattle smash their heads repeatedly on concrete, struggle and vocalize in pain for minutes after blunt knives and inexperienced slaughtermen failed to make clean cuts to the throat.

These horrific acts of cruelty both traumatised and mobilised the nation.

Rallies were held in major capital cities of Australia, politicians’ in-boxes were flooded with emails opposing the live export trade, talkback radio was inundated with calls and MPs called for a conscience vote on the issue.

While for many Australians this story may have been their first exposure to the reality of the live export industry, concerned individuals and animal welfare organisations have been raising concerns to government and industry bodies about the inherent cruelty associated with live export for more than 30 years.

The live export industry and government would have us believe these horrific acts of animal cruelty were isolated incidents. This is not true.

One organisation opposing the live export industry is VALE (Vets Against Live Export). This group of more than 100 veterinarians has spoken out to show the reality behind live export, and expose the people who continue to let it happen despite overwhelming evidence of poor animal welfare at all stages of the live export process.

Despite repeated assurances by government and industry bodies that animal welfare standards were being met, further revelations of animal brutality were revealed in November 2012, this time to sheep exported to Pakistan.

This time, in Another Bloody Business, viewers witnessed sheep being stabbed, clubbed and buried alive in their thousands.

How much suffering must these animals endure for the sake of profit?

The live export industry does not recognise sheep and cattle as living, breathing, sentient beings capable of feeling pain and experiencing fear.

Instead they are viewed as “commodities” no different to wheat, gold, oil and natural gas. Such sentient beings are regarded as units of production in an industrial process.

It is morally reprehensible the Australian government defends large-scale animal cruelty associated with the brutal live export trade just because it pays someone’s bills.

Similar arguments to those used by the Australian government and the live export industry were used in favour of continuing the slave trade.

Those who view sheep and cattle as units of production are at odds with not only large segments of the Australian population but also, arguably, God.

In 1990 the Pope stated animals “possess(ed) a soul and that men must love and feel solidarity with our smaller brethren.”

According to Nobel Prize winner John M Coetzee: “Something has gone badly wrong in relations between human beings and other animals, and it is not just animal welfare and animal rights organisations that say so. Large swathes of the public are troubled too.”

]]> RSPCA approved farming labels challenged https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/rspca-approved-farming-labels-challenged/ Sat, 08 Dec 2012 23:25:41 +0000 http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1193 RSPCA approved farming labels challenged
By  ANNE GREENAWAY Nov. 24, 2012.

RSPCA approved farming labels challenged height=218

A recent assessment by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) rejected an application by the Australian Egg Corporation relating to a free-range certification trademark.

Public submissions were invited by the ACCC and more than 1700 were received with all but seven opposed to the application.

In light of this decision it is difficult to comprehend an earlier decision of the ACCC with respect to concerns being raised in relation to RSPCA Approved Farming Standards (Paw of Approval) being applied to free range Primo pork products.

The labeling of this product shows a wide open paddock with the words free range displayed in large print. Accompanying the image are the words “This product proudly meets the RSPCA’s independent and animal-welfare friendly practices”.

However close inspection of the RSPCA’s document entitled RSPCA Approved Farming Scheme Standards reveals high stocking densities of about 19,768 pigs per hectare. This concentration is not what the community considers to be free range  consumers pay a premium for free range products and are entitled to have confidence in the labels and accompanying logos attached to food products.

The RSPCA standards may cause consumer confusion making it difficult to make an informed choice. The integrity of free range in the eyes of the consumer has the potential to be compromised.

There is increased public awareness and heightened concerns surrounding food production methods and animal welfare.

Consumers purchasing animal products are entitled to truth in labeling.

Greens MP Dr John Kaye has recently introduced a bill into NSW Parliament with respect to truth in labeling. However the Minister for Primary Industries, Katrina Hodkinson, has indicated she will not support this bill.
The Minister for Primary Industries and her department has enforcement powers for animal cruelty matters under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (POCCTA). Under POCCTA some farming methods are exempt.

An additional difficulty arises in that a Department of Primary Industries views itself as a “friend” of industry or producer interests. There is a conflict of interest with the DPI being responsible for the administration and enforcement of animal protection statutes, such as POCCTA.

In addition to concerns about high stocking densities with respect to RSPCA approval logos as applied to Primo free range pork products, there would appear to be a further conflict of interest as RSPCA derives a commercial advantage from this arrangement due to the RSPCA charging producers 2 per cent of products sold to use their logos.

In the UK, activists from Animal Aid have released shocking footage from piggeries whose pork products carry the RSPCA Freedom Food logo.

A recent 2012 UK report Entitled Farm Assurance Schemes and Animal Welfare (How the Standards Compare) found that there were a number of “key areas for improvement” with the RSPCA Freedom Food scheme which scored poorly in a number of areas against set welfare criteria.

While misleading labeling continues animal welfare will be severely compromised, consumers conned, and farmers providing higher welfare standards with lower stocking densities and higher production costs will be unable to compete with farmers using more intensively-farmed livestock production methods masquerading as free range.

A written request was made to the RSPCA to confirm the stocking density for outdoor pigs as per the RSPCA Approved Farming Scheme was less than one square metre for a 35 kilogram pig.

The RSPCA was also asked to disclose the dollar amount the RSPCA received from royalties from sales of all pork products which carry the RSPCA Approved Farming Paw of Approval. No response was received from the RSPCA in relation to these queries.

 

 

http://www.dailyliberal.com.au/story/1141797/rspca-approved-farming-labels-challenged/?cs=120 

 

]]> LETTER: Death-row pets don’t need to die https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/lll/ Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:14:37 +0000 http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1186 Newcastle Herald

LETTER: Death-row pets don’t need to die

By ANIMAL RESCUE GROUPS

 

EVERY year more than 250,000 dogs and cats are killed in our shelters and pounds.

The number keeps rising and the cruelty and neglect associated with it is heartbreaking.

For many years, small animal rescue charities have worked at the coalface of this tragic situation, saving unwanted dogs and cats from the public and unclaimed animals on death row from the many pounds around the country.

Many also have been assisting low-income people with desexing their animals by working within their communities. They do all this on very limited budgets and most involved are volunteers.

How long are we to sit by and watch as our major animal welfare organisation fails to use the public’s donated funds to save more lives than it does now?

The time for change is now.

Barbara Steffensen, Pam Holmes

Supported by more than 90 Australian rescue groups

 

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/422984/letter-death-row-pets-dont-need-to-die/?cs=315

 

]]> OPINION: Poor rescue groups shame rich RSPCA https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/opinion-poor-rescue-groups-shame-rich-rspca-2/ Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:55:41 +0000 http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1168 Newcastle Herald

OPINION: Poor rescue groups shame rich RSPCA

By DAVID ATWELL

 

EVERY year thousands of companion animal rescue volunteers save thousands of dogs and cats from pounds and shelters across the state.

These community-based rescue groups don’t have any of the resources or financial backing that the RSPCA enjoys, yet when they can co-ordinate with a council-run pound the results are magnificent.

In our region alone, Wyong Council Animal Care Facility has a kill ratio of 12 per cent, while Muswellbrook’s facility has one of 4 per cent for dogs.

Meanwhile the RSPCA NSW, with an overall kill rate of over 50 per cent, continues to make excuses for ignoring the community’s expectations.

The rescue groups re-home thousands of cats and dogs every year, akin to the numbers of the RSPCA. These groups are major players in the companion animal field and have a significant part to play.

So it was extremely disappointing that not one rescue group or representative was accepted on the government’s companion animal taskforce.

This taskforce was formed, in part, to try to reduce the number of animals euthanised in this state every year. The organisation that destroys more animals than any other single institution is the RSPCA. Yet it was on this taskforce, whereas rescue groups, the major player in the saving and re-homing of animals, were not.

Vet and member of state parliament, Andrew Cornwell, the taskforce chairman, was lobbied by a large number of the rescue groups, to no effect.

Lobbying the responsible government ministers was likewise fruitless.

In the circumstance I am not surprised by the comments of Mr Cornwell in supporting the RSPCA, even though some feel it has outdated practices, including the objectionable behavioural test, while rescue groups expert in modern practices were marginalised.

With an overall kill rate exceeding 50 per cent, it is disconcerting to know that the RSPCA made more than $10 million profit last year, received a $7.5 million government grant, and holds more than $30 million in shares and other investments.

Council-run pounds, which have small budgets, and rescue groups that are constantly broke can achieve far greater results.

They deal with exactly the same type of animals under the same conditions as the RSPCA.

Yet the contrasting results couldn’t be more alarming.

We believe the RSPCA NSW must review and reform its practices and policies voluntarily, especially considering it can well afford it – before calls for governmental intervention become commonplace.

This becomes even more evident when we compare the NSW RSPCA branch with its ACT counterpart.

The RSPCA ACT has reported a kill ratio of a mere 6.5 per cent.

Clearly something is wrong in NSW.

None of our criticism is aimed at RSPCA volunteers and workers – our criticisms are aimed at the leadership by RSPCA senior management and board, who seem to think everything is fine.

We argue that it is not.

David Atwell is the vice-president of the Society of Companion Animal Rescuers.

 

 http://www.theherald.com.au/story/416781/opinion-poor-rescue-groups-shame-rich-rspca/

  • Geoffd • 8 days ago

    Well said David.  RSPCA’s practices and kill rates have been shown to be simply inexcusable.   The community rescue groups and council pounds, working together, show that there is a viable, effective and ethical alternative.

    More and more animals are being killed daily while RSPCA delays action to reform their temperament testing and high kill rate mentality.

    And when will the four Hunter councils that send to RSPCA Rutherford – Newcastle, Lake Macquarie, Cessnock and Maitland – be called to account for choosing to feed animals into a known high-kill organisation (and paying RSPCA millions of dollars of local ratepayers’ funds for the privilege)?

  • Avatar
    Vinfimoult • 8 days ago

    Well said David I totally agree with your comments….Im in disbelief that no rescue groups or organisations were given a place on this Task Force… It almost looks like a Government closed shop task force that will produce exactly what the Govt and RSPCA want.. Sometimes I think the RSPCA is about to be taken over and run as a Govt department…. It is certainly acting like one now and has great government support.

  • Avatar
    Evon Ingleby • 8 days ago

    A very well written article by someone at the coal face working hard to save lives. Yes there is definitely something wrong in NSW and it is a matter of life and death for our companion animals. No more excuses will be accepted from RPSCA NSW about the fact that they kill thousands of happy , healthy rehomable animals. Why ? Arrogance ?  Laziness ? In the too hard basket perhaps ?It is easy to blame the public for over breeding but the facts speak for themselves .
    They just don’t try hard enough to save them and that”s a fact.

  • Avatar
    Anne Greenaway • 7 days ago

    On 4/10/2012 I checked
    the RSPCA Adoptapet website. I specifically went to the Newcastle tab and
    looked for cats and dogs. As I understand it Newcastle represents the
    Rutherford holding facility and this facility holds the cats and dogs for
    Maitland, Lake Macquarie, Cessnock and Newcastle.

    I am told this facility
    has around 120 holding pens for dogs. I am not sure of the holding pens for
    cats. There were 20 (twenty) cats and dogs showing at 4/1/2012 on Adoptapet BUT
    only 3 had photos and/or write ups. Photos and write ups have been proved to
    dramatically increase the liklihood of an animal finding a home. Where are
    all the other cats and dogs?

    Contrast this with
    PETRESCUE site (also checked on 4/10/2012). In the Hunter/Newcastle area there
    are animal rescue groups such as Dog Rescue Newcastle, Hunter Animal Rescue,
    Newcastle Pound Pooch, Puppy Love Rescue, Sawyers Gully Rescue. On this site on
    4/10/2012 there were 152 dogs and cats and all of them had photos and/or write
    ups.

    Foster based rescue has been
    shown to be an effective way of rehoming
    animals, giving the animal time to readjust to home life, to socialise and to
    work on any problem behaviours before rehoming.  And it’s a much better
    experience for the buyers too, as they can meet the dog in a normal environment
    without the stress (on both animal and buyer) of the shelter conditions.  Yet RSPCA NSW rarely works with the
    established community foster groups.

    Looking at the stats from
    the rspca nsw annual report page 50/51 we can see that after reclaims (by
    owners) the kill rate for cats and dogs (combined) is 59%. How is killing 59%
    of unclaimed cats and dogs caring and protecting them?

    As explained to me by
    staff of the RSPCA, the behaviour assessment/temperament test that the RSPCA
    NSW uses is used as a PASS/FAIL test, rather than diagnostic tool to obtain an
    overall picture of the dog. The test does not take into account that different
    breeds of dogs may react differently according to genetics. There is a lack of
    transparency regarding the temperament test and I question the rspca’s claim
    that large numbers of cats and dogs are killed for medical and behavioural
    problems. Why are these medical and behavioural problems not presenting at
    other council pounds (who work with rescue) or indeed at the RSPCA shelter in the ACT?

    Again I checked the RSPCA
    Adoptapet website for Newcastle. There are a total of TEN puppies/dogs
    cats/kittens showing, and only 2 have photos/captions. I have not checked the
    Petrescue website but without looking, I would be happy to wager a bet that
    there are over a total of 100 entries by the community rescue groups named above
    – all with photos and captions.

    Where are all the RSPCA Newcastle’s missing cats, dogs, puppies and kittens?

  • Avatar
    Natemontana • 7 days ago

    Very well said Daivd. I have previously worked with the RSPCA NSW and helped bring these assessments into Australia. They are not being used for the purpose they were brought in for…..TO FIND OUT WHAT ISSUES NEEDED to be worked with via rehabilitation. NOT just finding a reason to kill them. I have posted my similar comments on YouTube under Nate Barnes RSPCA. THANK YOU SOOOO MUCH David and the rest of those forcing change for the animals. Sort of like, “helping the RSPCA NSW against, yet for the RSPCA”. Keep up the good work. People reading please call your local RSPCA, council, State / Federal Government and ask who complaints about policies or injustices within the society, can be directed towards. NO ONE, the RSPCA is AUTONOMOUS. NATHAN BARNES 1st ever RSPCA Animal Behavioural Trainier 2003, Certified Body Language Assessor and Educator. International K-9, Horse and Cat aggressive and submissive behaviour management, 10+ years.

  • Avatar
    Ziggi • 7 days ago

    The RSPCA have lost all sight of what they where introduced for TO PROTECT ANIMALS now unfortunately it is all about money and profit. Some of that funding should be going to providing free neutering working with vets to reduce costs. Animals are not put to sleep they are murdered. This article says it all and it is not just in NSW it is happening in other states the RSPCA in WA is a disgrace. Rescue groups are doing an amazing job to save the unwanted animals. The only way to protect animals is to give them a bill of rights animals should not be classed as property. The RSPCA should be campaigning for this and should have been for a number of years. Just look at what Animals Australia and Oscars Law are doing and yet the RSPCA are so well known they could do so much good.

  • Avatar
    traceybee • 8 days ago

    Well said David, more people need to be aware of the facts so changes can be made. Why aren’t NSW RSPCA looking at the practices of ACT RSPCA to lower their kill rates? The public should be re-directing their donations to local rescue groups and telling the RSPCA why.

  • Avatar
    Maxijj • 7 days ago

    Harking back to my childhood the RSPCA was held in the most highest esteem being the authority we turned to when we saw animals being mistreated and knew that RSPCA would assist. Sadly, this is not the case nowadays when the almighty dollar is God and the organisation is run by a greedy bunch of bureaucrats. This is not to detract from the “foot soldiers” and dedicated volunteers at RSPCA – sadly these good souls are not in decision-making positions.

  • Mz_Linda • 8 days ago

    Well it’s obvious that there’s something wrong in the RSPCA NSW. Their methodology is obviously NOT working as it should be. If the RSPCA has managed their roles more appropriately I feel there would be no need for so many rescue groups out their.

  • Avatar
    Gayl • 7 days ago

    On the 10th October I sent an email to Steve Coleman CEO of RSPCA NSW. I asked him what the name of the rescue groups that he claimed that RSPCA work with. His answer……” I will have to discuss the privacy issues with those particular groups”.

    I replied and asked him to please do and to get back to me with the names of the groups……..

    I’M STILL WAITING STEVE COLEMAN!!!! I think the public have a right to know and I believe that any rescue group would gladly accept the publicity!!

  • Avatar
    Carol Cornish • 7 days ago

    Well said. I wrote a letter to the Newcastle Morning Herald yesterday about this exact topic. Why isn’t the government helping animal rescue groups who help animals instead of giving millions in government grant to the RSPCA.

    I still have no answer as to what type of salary packages people like Steve Coleman are on. Company car? All expenses paid etc.

  • Avatar
    David_mulder • 7 days ago

    Good on you David. The RSPCA still ring me up and try to get a donation out of me. I tell them I now support local rescue groups that are doing the right thing. If everyone put their donations this way the RSPCA would hopefully fold and a new organisation with morals towards animals would be formed with honest people at the helm. We also need to target the unsuspecting elderly population who in good faith leave them money in their Will thinking it will be used for the good of all animals!

  • Avatar
    Mike • 7 days ago

    It is unfortunate that old and established organisations, often pioneers and the first in their fields get stuck in the tradition of how it has always been, and see any voice that suggests an alternative approach may achieve better outcomes; as one of extremism or ignorance.
    My concern about the  task force is that it appears to be stacked in favour of the status quo like it was last time, with no representation from those who have dared to suggested a new approach is needed.

    If I was to allow my cynical opinion of politics to speak, then I would say that I expect any outcomes from the taskforce to reinforce the power and position of the vested interests ,and make life even harder for the small volunteer groups by putting more hurdles in their way.I really hope that I am wrong about that but it looks like the taskforce is just going to rubber stamp decisions, already made in the corridors of the “Animal Welfare Industry Club” The RSPCA and others of their kind in NSW ceased to be about meaningful animal welfare, when they put the long term financial security of their organisation, above the function of saving animals from abuse and death.

    If these large established organisations closed tommorow the small organisations would soon have the kill rate down into single figures. Whereas if the small groups are forced out the kill rate will be much higher than it is now.

  • Avatar
    Marianhalton48 • 7 days ago

    David, I could not agree more! If little unknown rescue groups can foster & re-home dogs and cats, surely a big well known organisation like the RSPCA could also do the same. Too much money on management is probbaly very correct, and what is all the profits for? Its all meant to be spent on the animals.
    They are meant to be to prevent cruelty to animals , yet blatently put so many down. They need to do away with that assessment as discussed on Insight, its just ridiculous! And pracise what they are supposed to be ~ and prevent cruelty to animals by putting down perfectly healthy pets.

  • Avatar
    Natemontana • 7 days ago

    Type your comment here.WHY ARE THE RSPCA ALLOWED TO DENY ACCESS TO RESCUE GROUPS..? We the community give the RSPCA money to do EVERYTHING within their power to save animals… They are not.. WHY ? It’s is a question they should answer.. Please ask

  • Avatar
    Ruth King • 7 days ago

    Absolutely no different in Victoria, except we also have the misnamed Lost Dogs’s Home to contend with. Mildura pound used to be serviced by the RSPCA. I am unable to quote exact figures, except to say that the pound now works with rescue and their rehome rate is brilliant. Probably under 4%, and that would only be for aggressive and extremely sick dogs. Sadly, cats have a bigger kill rate everywhere. The RSPCA in their annual report  released their kill rates.  Peninsula  Vic RSPCA killed 24.5% of their unclaimed dogs and 26.7% of unclaimed cats. Obviously time to start releasing to rescue.

  • Avatar
    Toucans • 8 days ago

    Glad that this was published. The public are really misled by the RSPCA and the animals that die because of this is terrible.

  • Avatar
    Tlouisn • 8 days ago

    All true David. The RSPCA has been treated like some kind of sacred cow due for far too long. It is about time someone shines a light one their high kill rate and change of focus. They are are no longer all about the animals, it is increasingly obvious that they are all about the money. They need to open up their big fat wallets and start spending money on actually saving lives!  Spend some of that stockpile on free or cheap desexing and less on big management paychecks and media spin. Andrew Cornwell, wake up to yourself and give rescue groups a seat at the table. They are the ones doing the work that the public thinks the RSPCA are doing!

  • Avatar
    pam • 8 days ago

    Well said David,
    Its time that the RSPCA actually did something pro-active in the area of companion animals.
    For far to long they have left it to the hundreds of “coal faced”  animal rescue groups to pick up the pieces.
    I wonder what the kill rates would be for the RSPCA if every rescue group were to suddenly “shut their doors”?

  • Avatar
    Mel • 8 days ago

    About time. The RSPCA should be ashamed of themselves.

  • Avatar
    Karen • 7 days ago

    David congratulations. I am tired of hearing the RSPCA excuses and the euthanasia rates are unacceptable. Having worked at the ground level of rescue and still very much involved, it is hard to accept that so many dogs do not pass the temperament testing set by the RSPCA.
    If the testing is done within the first few weeks, very few dogs will pass, particularly given the stressful conditions the dog is living in. There are solutions and so many rescue groups are a testament to that. Thank you again David.

  • Avatar
    Alison Smith • 7 days ago

    RSPCA must look at what they do and change.  Others can, so should they.

  • Avatar
    Larsensg • 8 days ago

    Need some lobbying done to secure places on this taskforce. Well said as always David.

  • Pam Holmes • 15 hours ago

    Not only are there no rescue groups on this so called Task force, but we have the PIAA !, this large and powerful org represents puppy mills-pet shops etc,why are they on it?. Also the AVA- what do they know other then they think they are desexing themselves out of business,why are they on it?
    And of course the RSPCA- with one of the highest kill rates in NSW.-why are they on it?.
    Rescue groups have earned the right to have a voice, we do more with less and we have the answers.
    Lets try something new-

    Albert Einstein Quotes

    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

  • Avatar
    Maxilla • 2 days ago

    In April this year we adopted a Cattle Dog mix from RSPCA Yagoona. I have to say the staff were great, we were literally grilled about ‘special needs breeds ownership’ (which is great, bring it on!) to then be told the dog we chose was a cruelty seizure and inspectors case. We were Ok with that, understood things may not be ”perfect” in a real home environment at least for a little while. I have to say they did a GREAT job with this girl. For what she went through and the level of calm and obedience/skill she had on leash, and yet to do things like pee herself with fright when you opened a newspaper. She’s much better now and is my total heart dog but to this day, after finding out all this stuff about RSPCA adn their kill rates, and the criteria for their dogs being rehomable or not – I am astonished she made it through. Thank God she did.
    We foster for a rescue group and our current dog was scared, reactive and ”aggressive” (ie defensively growled) for the first two weeks. He’s an absolute love bug now and totally different dog given that he was offered proper nutrition, training, stability and consistent kindness. But following RSPCA NSW criteria he’d also be 6 feet under right now. I’m excited about his future. He is a terrific dog with much to offer and someone will be very very lucky to adopt him in the future.

  • sandy • 2 days ago

    I wonder if Andrew Cornwell is aware the RSPCA inspectors even go out and shoot people’s stock.
    Unacceptable kill rates is only half the problem, complete unaccountability for their actions and NO ombudsman to intervene or hold this group accountable is a complete breech of human AND animal rights. A yearly report submitted to the relevant Minister does not equate with accountability in any way shape or form.

  • Pam Holmes • 4 days ago

     Doug Sethton,This is one of the old excuses dragged out by the RSPCA ” Oh we don’t get to pick and choose and we are open door shelter”  so are many other rescue groups such as Animal Rights and Rescue in Nth NSW who pull animals off deathrow from 3 pounds in their area and have managed to operate as non kill for many years without ANY help despite the fact that the RSPCA spin machine run full page adverts in the local paper where the RSPCA don’t even have a pound/shelter!!-why is the RSPCA running a POUND in the first place?As for preventing births in the fist place rescue groups have been begging for funding to go into HIGH-VOLUME _LOW COST_FREE desexing programs for years to no avail, oops sorry they will do some discount but its just enough to say they are doing some lol, anyway why would you want to reduce companion animals if it were you job???

  • Avatar
    smoke screen • 6 days ago

    Extremely well said David. Lets stop beating around the bush and cut straight to the chase. Lets stop killing animals for profit!

  • Avatar
    guest • 7 days ago

    Not sure why RSPCA ACT can have a kill rate of 6.5% and Mr Coleman is on TV trying to justify their RSPCA NSW kill rate because they have to take all surrenders.

  • Avatar
    Shellbaker2010 • 7 days ago

    Well said David. I agree with all you have said. How does the RSPCA NSW justify this? They really should be doing much better with all the money and resources behind them.

  • Avatar
    Doug Sethton • 7 days ago

    Sorry, dont agree. It is easy to have. Low kill rate if you are a Small group that only accepts as many animals as it can handle. RSPCA IS A POUND and therefore receives hundreds of animals per week. It is unreasonable and ‘head in the sand’ to think that they can find hundreds of homes each week day in and out. Face the facts people. My issue is that RSPCA and other rich large groups DO NOT DO ENOUGH to educate and PREVENT births of unwanted companion animals.

    • Avatar
      Mike • 6 days ago • parent

      Doug, it seems to me that you know little about the small groups as you call them, maybe you should contact one and see how they operate before you comment on how selective they are. if they can manage with no resources to  between them find homes for thousands of companion animals each year, surely then the RSPCA with its vast resources, network, and good will, would be able to do it far more easily. But you are absolutely right about the education and de-sexing issue

    • Avatar
      David Atwell • 6 days ago • parent

      Whilst I agree with your thoughts about the RSPCA not doing enough, please take note that I was quoting the kill rates from POUNDS (Wyong & Muswellbrook) not rescue groups. They are NOT rescue groups. These pounds, like the RSPCA run ones, do the exact same thing – take in animals which are surrenders, take in ones left in their surrender bins, and take in animals which the rangers capture. That’s a FACT. Yet Wyong has an overall kill rate of 12% & Muswellbrook has one of 4% for dogs.

      If you want more stats from the regional pounds to compare, I can tell you that Singleton has one of 17.5% whilst Gosford has one of 15.5%.

      If you want to talk the kill ratio of rescue groups it is even lower. I can’t speak for the others, but I know SoCares has a kill rate of zero. But to be fair we’ve been illness free so far this year. Some groups have to face issues such as parvo. Yet even allowing for things like that the kill rate for any one rescue group would be less than 1%.

      Furthermore some of the larger rescue groups will take in surrenders of all types – even ones requiring vet work. These are little known FACTS which, because rescue groups can’t afford TV advertising or making TV shows, unlike the RSPCA, we can’t educate the public as to everything rescue groups & council run pounds actually do.

       

    • Avatar
      Anne Greenaway • 6 days ago • parent

      Doug, Wyong is an OPEN admission pound, Singleton is an OPEN admission pound, Muswellbrook is an open admission pound but their kill rates are markedly less than RSPCA NSW. Also ACT RSPCA has kill rates of around 6.5% yet NSW RSPCA is over 50%. Do dogs and cans get sicker and behave more badly when they cross the ACT/NSW border?????

  • Avatar
    compassionkat • 7 days ago

    Well said, David. The RSPCA’s kill rates are indefensible. This organisation is not on the side of the animals. It has become a hard-hearted, profit making business, intent on capitalising on the misfortunes of ‘all creatures great and small.’

    NSW RSPCA  needs to lift its game, the community is learning the truth about their high-kill culture.
    I for one, am giving my suppor tand donations to the no-kill rescue groups. I want animals saved, not
    thrown out in body bags.

  • Avatar
    Marg • 7 days ago

    In my opinion the RSPCA for many years has been out of touch with community expectations.  My expectations and fellow dog lovers which are many cannot understand why the RSPCA still relies on their version of temperament testing to determine whether a dog is rehomable.  Many dogs have been abused, neglected and lived in horrific circumstances.  Yet they rely on a test that gives the dog little or no time to change.  Ridiculous.   We support no kill.  Every dog deserves love, compassion and security.  I thought that was what the RSPCA was about the Protection of animals.  I don’t see that anymore. All I see is a corporation and a business that has lost sight of their original formation. That to me is totally sad.   Rescue groups work very hard for their funds, they don’t have the luxury that the RSPCA have yet they are out their saving as many dogs as possible.

  • Avatar
    Di_keenan • 7 days ago

    As a pet lover and donator to the RSPCA I find this whole situation quite distressing. Have I naively been contributing my hard earned cash to kill animals? It makes me sick to the stomach that I am a conspirator to murder. It’s time someone like Mr Atwell was included on a task force that was supposedly formed in the best interest of companion animals instead of heads of corporations that are more concerned with KPIs.

  • Avatar
    Kattrina_s • 7 days ago

    Well said David. The public need to know how this BUSINESS is being run…

  • Avatar
    TQDOGS • 8 days ago

    Good on you David, very well written facts, needs to said and heard.

    • sandy • 2 days ago • parent

      How many people are aware that in a segment of RSPCA ANIMAL RESCUE, the inspector received a complaint that a dog with docked tail was at a certain address.  Upon arrival the inspector found an upper story window open, found a ladder and accessed the property through that open window. Found and seized the dog in question, removed it from its home to their shelter anesthetized the dog
      for xrays to see if it was born or not like that.  ALL done without the owner’s knowledge or
      consent.
      No police officer can enter and seize without a warrant, all an RSPCA Inspector needs by law is to “form the opinion” the animal should be
      seized,  to enter and seize anywhere including  inside your own home. Yet how many people have been told the Inspectors are powerless as long as there is food and water?
      Our politicians have handed absolute power to this “charity”. Why is this so? And with nothing in place for the owner to appeal.

    • sandy • 2 days ago • parent

      What I really find hard to understand is why our politicians are happy to leave the RSPCA the only group who has no accountability  or ombudsman in place to investigate them?

      They have it for the police, the Military, you name it but not the RSPCA with more powers than the police force?

      Try it some time, there is no appeal process in place, never has been.

 

]]> LETTER: Come together, now https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/letter-come-together-now/ Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:40:25 +0000 http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1156 LETTER: Come together, now

Newcastle Herald

By GEOFF DAVIDSON

 

JEFF Corbett (‘‘A dog’s life, or death’’ Herald 26/10) – there is a link between the RSPCA’s kill rates and puppy breeding, but not just the one assumed.

So few animals pass RSPCA’s temperament test that RSPCA Rutherford regularly has only eight to 10 dogs available on its Adoptapet website, compared with more than 100 from the Hunter rescue groups on the PetRescue site.

Very few on Adoptapet have photos and write-ups which allow a potential owner to work out whether it’s worth the trip to Rutherford to view the animal. Yet it seems RSPCA NSW could produce a video excusing its kill rates and profits in the six days between the SBS Insight program being filmed and it airing.

As a foster carer for a rescue group, I hear all the time, ‘‘We looked at RSPCA, but they didn’t have anything suitable.’’

A properly functioning RSPCA working with rescue groups could cut a swathe through the puppy farm/unregistered breeder industry. How many more must die before the RSPCA is reformed?

Geoff Davidson, Ourimbah

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/426652/letter-come-together-now/?cs=315

 

 

 

]]> LETTERS: Some questions about animals https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/letters-some-questions-about-animals/ Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:38:43 +0000 http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1153 Newcastle Herald

 

LETTERS: Some questions about animals

By Anne Greenaway

 

 As principal solicitor for law firm Lawyers for Companion Animals, I have concerns about the composition of the companion animals taskforce.

The taskforce has denied repeated requests to have representation on it by community rescue groups.

In the United States, on the Dallas task force, more than 50per cent of the people on it are, or have previously been, part of community rescue groups.

Most of the members on the state government’s taskforce have not implemented meaningful solutions to reduce the kill rate of our companion animals. In this  effort grassroots rescue organisations are leading the way.

What is of even more concern is that the taskforce failed to support Clover Moore’s inquiry into companion animals, which would have allowed an open inquiry into the issues causing high companion-animal euthanasia.

Why is the chairman of the taskforce repeatedly defending the actions of the NSW RSPCA, which uses a temperament test that results in the death thousands of dogs a year because of ‘‘behavioural issues’’?

Why is the RSPCA repeatedly rejecting offers from rescue groups to assist them?

Why did the RSPCA NSW not proactively bring the issue of high kill rate of companion animals to the public’s attention, instead of quietly killing companion animals, while at the same time accepting donations and bequests to protect and care for them?

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/424395/letters-some-questions-about-animals/?cs=315

]]> RSPCA refuses debate https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/rspca-refuses-debate/ Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:17:47 +0000 http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1146 Daily Liberal

RSPCA refuses debate

By LISA MINNER

 

  • A request put to RSPCA CEO Steve Coleman to participate in a televised debate with local lawyer Anne Greenaway, has been declined.A request put to RSPCA CEO Steve Coleman to participate in a televised debate with local lawyer Anne Greenaway, has been declined.

A REQUEST put to RSPCA CEO Steve Coleman to participate in a televised debate with local lawyer Anne Greenaway, has been declined.

The Companion animal lawyer challenged the CEO to defend the kill rate statistics in the RSPCA report for 2011.

Ms Greenaway is querying the medical and behavioural criteria used to determine which animals are euthanased and which are rehomed.

The lawyer said the RSPCA should make the temperament test (or behavioural assessment), available for public scrutiny.

Mr Coleman said in response to the challenge: “In terms of a debate, it seems futile given RSPCA – without any legal obligation – happily and transparently publishes statistics, warts and all.”

“We aren’t trying to hide from the public, the RSPCA simply exists because of the public.

“Rather than a debate, perhaps Anne could focus her energy and passion into helping to prevent animals from ending up in shelters in the first place,” he said.

Mr Coleman said the RSPCA was investing in, as well managing livestock related matters, investigating cruelty matters, lobbying for better welfare legislation, developing partnerships with Petbarn, and integrating new programs such as Drives for Lives to assist in the rehoming of animals across the state.

RSPCA NSW is always open to improvements and is already well aware of the concerns from the public in regards to the perceived high euthanasia rates, he said.

“Each year the RSPCA works toward reducing the number of unwanted animals that end up with them.

He said they usually have severe behavioural or medical issues.

Mr Coleman said the RSPCA is involved in educating the public by working with pet owners in the community, including pensioners, low income earners, welfare groups, the elderly, indigenous groups and the homeless.

“We also increase the number of animals being rehomed through dog rehabilitation programs, robust foster care networks, volunteers and ongoing improvements/training in animal behavioural testing and other operations/service at all the shelters across NSW,” he said.

Mr Coleman made no comment regarding the temperament test.

lisa.minner@ruralpress.com

  http://www.dailyliberal.com.au/story/416738/rspca-refuses-debate/

 

  • over it • 5 days ago

    lets fix the problem by shutting down every puppy farm and desexing all animals sold through pet shops and crack down on back yard breeders.RSPCA what do you have to hide???

  • Avatar
    TS • 6 days ago

    There is no disputing that companion animals are in vast oversupply , due to Puppy farms and BYB’s and completely in adequate and uncaring legislation,  however the behaviour of the RPSCA NSW and similar large organisations is also highly disreputable. They are akin to the Coles and Woolworths of the grocery market. These large organisations are business first and a caring shelter last. Their charter is chase more and more funds at any cost, and to hell with the animals outcome. Therefore they will happily sign up to more councils and take more and more animals than they knowingly will ever be able rehome and manage/have room for.   Remember they even make money from the destrucation of animals by selling the corpsesvals for blood and bone. In the case of the RSPCA  they then devise a  completely unfair temperament and administer it in a way designed to fail the animals, so as to in some way justify their destruction rates to the public by saying so rehomable animal was destroyed .  The RPSCA Victoria have similar high euthanasia rates as NSW and similar policies . Since the Lost Dogs Home took over Brisbane City Council shelter from AWL Qld the euthanasia rate has noticably climbed.  The reality is, if there were such a  high number of animals with behavioural issues then Council run shelters and No kill rescue groups would be would be constantly in the news for all the wrong reasons. Little wonder Mr Coleman refuses to debate to Ms Geenaway. You can’t defend the indefensible. Finally take a look at the SCPA  New Zealand (no affiliation to the RSPCA) saving lives http://rnzspca.org.nz/saving-l… and you will see the total contrast in the organisations. No good enough RSPCA!

  • Avatar
    Karen • 5 days ago

    The NSW RSPCA was included on the NSW Animal Taskforce panel and yet Steve Coleman has the audacity to state that Ms Greenaway would be best served in focusing her energy and passion into preventing animals from ending up in shelters. Honestly what do you think she is doing? Ms Greenaway’s work is focussed on helping these animals, it is a shame the RSPCA as a voice on the Taskforce panel is yet to provide final recommendations with clear policies to reduce the kill rate. While we are still waiting for these recommendations further animals die. Steve Coleman if you cared about these high kill rates you would be called to urgent action..

  • Avatar
    Mel • 5 days ago

    Steve, you’re a gutless wonder, if it wasn’t for your determination to needlessly kill cats and dogs I would be laughing at your pathetic self. Honestly, I’ve seen terrified wild cats with more courage in one little paw that Steve has in his whole body. By the way ratepayer I, as is the case with many other
    Australians, feed, desex and care for those wild and community cats out of my own pocket you ill
    informed ignoramus- grow a brain! Anyone with any knowledge of rescue or the RSPCA knows they are far from transparent with their stats- there’s so much room for fudging that you could drive a herd of cattle through there. If that’s Steve’s proof that the RSPCA has nothing to hide, then he hasn’t got a leg to stand on. Good lord, they weren’t even willing to share their temperament test with the public or media until their hand was forced. Steve’s idea of working with rescue groups is allowing them to pay the RSPCA money for the “privilege” of reducing RSPCA’s workload and doing the job the RSPCA should already be doing. No wonder everyone told you where to stick it, grass roots rescue groups around Australia would rather kill ourselves doing everything we can to prevent animals being handed over to the RSPCA than give you one red cent. You’re nothing but a parasite and I think if the rest of the RSPCA board hasn’t figured out yet that you’re a liability, they will soon. When the most common cause of death for Australian companion animals every year is entry into our most well known and well funded animal rescue organisations you know you’ve got a problem. If anyone is inclined to blindly place their faith in Steve and the RSPCA NSW, I encourage you to educate yourself, get involved, you don’t have to take our word for it. You’ll soon learn not to trust Steve as far as you can throw him. While Steve is the laughing stock of the animal welfare community, Nathan Winograd is getting included in the Forbes 15 key thinkers of the year. No Kill is not only possible, as has been proven where the No Kill Equation has been implemented, it is the way of the future.

  • Avatar
    Mel Hancock • 5 days ago

    Well thats a pity. It would be nice to have some open dialogue between the RSPCA, concerned professionals and citizens and other rescue groups. Perhaps then we could get better results for the animals who cop the brunt of our decisions.

  • Tee Kay • 5 days ago

    “We aren’t trying to hide from the public, the RSPCA simply exists because of the public.” and “Mr Coleman said the RSPCA is involved in educating the public…” Well if that is the case then please make the temperament test available for public scrutiny.

  • Avatar
    Kate Sidonie • 5 days ago

    We need a debate!!! Mr. Coleman, is obvioulksly too busy to mention the RSPCA’s share and investment portfolio of $30 million, plus the $7.5 million grant from the NSW government. The wealth of the RSPCA is in sad contrast to the massive kill rates 50% of animals entering the RSPCA lose their lives. I would love a debate, We need public scrutiny to save all the healthy animals killed by this so-called animal welfare organization.

  • Avatar
    Jo • 5 days ago

    I am a foster carer for a rescue group and I must say that many of the dogs that we rescue, that would have what the RSPCA claims are “severe behavioural” issues are just scared and frightened animals. Take them away from the daunting pound environment and place them into a loving home and these poor darlings true pleasant and loving natures are clearly evident. Please don’t tell me that 50% of the dogs and cats that come into their so called “protection” have behavioural issues so severe that all of them need to be killed! I have seen their temperament test and there is no way my placid pooch or any pooch belonging to any of my friends would pass such a test that was designed to make these animals fail. How exactly is a dog to be penalised for not sitting on command in the company of strangers? An untrained, frightened, neglected, or abused dog is most commonly NOT a viscious dog. Shame on you RSPCA. I have a huge network of friends and I for one have ensured that not one person I know will ever donate to the RSPCA again until they learn that they are there for one purpose only and that is to protect animals. Not kill at least half of them. I pity the poor lost and frightened animals to step foot into an RSPCA premise

  • Avatar
    Dr Barbara Trytko • 5 days ago

    There is no doubt the primary problem is with oversupply and the attitude of owners. So why isn’t the RSPCA doing more to address this issue on which there is minimal advertising? If oversupply is unable to be managed, then the RSPCA has been given a myriad of resources by the community and government to deal with this to the benefit of companion animals not their bank balance. I would refute Steve Coleman’s claim that RSPCA only euthenases dogs with severe behavioural issues. As breed specific rescue for Alaskan malamutes, we have a number of testimonials from people who have adopted dogs that have failed assessment, and are wonderful doggie citizens outside of the RSPCA. The only reason they were not euthenased at the time of surrender or impound was that they were lucky that one of the managers at the shelters they were left at were prepared to contact rescue. We have proof this is definitely not the case across the board and for all such dogs.

  • Avatar
    Katt’s • 5 days ago

    Coleman is aware of the publics concern of the “PERCEIVED” high euthanasia rates….????
    Fact is FACT from RSPCAs own statistics…. Close to 60% kill rate SHOULD be a concern for the public!!!!

  • Avatar
    Concerned • 5 days ago

    @ratepayer and @gemma it concerns me that despite all the discussion and media coverage around the unnecessary high kill rate of the RSPCA you still don’t understand the overall issue. It is not about stock piling sick and anti social animals and there is no level headed approach.
    A RSPCA shelter is supposed to be a safe place for animals where they have a second chance of a happy and healthy life. This is what the public thinks and supports without knowing that in fact once an animal lands in the pound it is very likely killed. The high kill rate of healthy animals who are wrongly labelled unsuitable for re-homing is the main concern, followed by the RSPCA’s inability to work with other rescue groups and gross financial mismanagement.
    The RSPCA prides itself in publishing its kill rate without any legal obligation which is true and somewhat noble if it were not in the form of endless numbers on a spreadsheet that the general public does not read. The greyhound racing industry also publishes figures but who cares? The data must be presented in a form that is easily accessible and digestible otherwise it has no impact at all.

  • Avatar
    compassionkat • 5 days ago

    The RSPCA refuses to debate the issue, and Mr. Coleman made no comment regarding the temp. test. This article is a supreme lesson in ‘spin doctoring.’ Mr. Coleman will the massive kill-rates at the RSPCA continue unabated? The debate did not happen, because we all know the RSPCA has too many secrets to hide.

  • Avatar
    Anne Greenaway • 5 days ago

    RATEPAYER – Your comments show ignorance in the first degree. The issue is the temperament test used to kill high numbers of cats and dogs.

    While MEDICAL and BEHAVIOURAL issues are used as an excuse to kill the reasons for the killings WILL NEVER be investigated.

    If the NSW RSPCA were HONEST and said they were killing for space, or killing due to the animals time being up, that would be bad enough but to use a flawed temperament test, often administered by inexperienced people in a strange environment to kill animals with treatable illnesses or who are afraid is reprehensible and a breach of donors trust – who give their money (in good faith) to the RSPCA in the belief that it will care and protect animals, not kill them.

  • Avatar
    Angel Dust • 5 days ago

    All of these statements are things I have NEVER seen implemented, (Mr Coleman said the RSPCA is involved in educating the public by working
    with pet owners in the community, including pensioners, low income
    earners, welfare groups, the elderly, indigenous groups and the
    homeless. ) I am a pet owner and never been informed about any of these things?? RSPCA’s silence about peoples outcry of the amount of animals killed is a disgrace, Coleman certainly would not want to debate the issue, becasue he has no intention of changing the statas quo, they think they are a law unto themselves and have to answer to no one. Well when enough people stop donating and ask for the resignation of the CEO and board, then they might consider doing something different. The RSPCA in ACT run by Michael Linke, has turned that establishment around to very low kill, if he can do this then why can’t the NSW branch and all braches. I know where my donations will go, certainly NOT to the RSPCA.

  • Avatar
    Julie • 5 days ago

    The RSPCA is funded by Government grants and the general public….why then can’t they be transparent about “the temperament test”…..makes me wonder what they have to hide?

  • Avatar
    compassionkat • 5 days ago

    Mr. Coleman says the RSPCA”… happily and transparently publishes statistics, warts and all.” Great, Steve, then why did you back out of the challenge. It was an opportunity for you to talk transparently about the kill-rates, the temp, test, the behavioural, and medical reasons for killing all those thousands of healthy cats and dogs. The public are growing suspicious. Steve, I noticed you refrained from mentioning the temp. test. What was it you said about transparentcy, and warts and all???

  • Avatar
    Angel dog • 5 days ago

    Unbelievable mr Coleman….what have you got to hide, I guess a good debate with Annie Greenaway has sent you packing. You owe it to the public to answer our questions. To have the hide to tell miss Greenaway to concentrate on helping the animals more. Well mr Coleman, she is…..we want the RSPCA get up and tell the public why their behavioural tests are acceptable and why they believe it works. Also, the kill rate, why is it so high? You have refused to work with rescue groups so get off your high horse and do this debate. 95 percent of the public believe RSPCA are not for animal welfare but another hideous money making business and use the animals for a cover. Your an utter disgrace Steve Coleman and along with thousands of others i will not support RSPCA ever again, unless your policies change…..grow some balls mr Coleman and do the debate.

  • Judy Fuller • 5 days ago

    definitely NOT good enough Steve Coleman and therefore RSPCA NSW…grow some balls and face the music in a public arena

    “He said they usually have severe behavioural or medical issues.” ….MASSIVE UNTRUTH

    “Rather than a debate, perhaps Anne could focus her energy and passion into helping to prevent animals from ending up in shelters in the first place,” Anne is already extremely active all matters relating to animal welfare

    “Mr Coleman said the RSPCA was investing in, as well managing livestock related matters, investigating cruelty matters, lobbying for better welfare legislation, developing partnerships with Petbarn, and integrating new programs such as Drives for Lives to assist in the rehoming of animals across the state.” ummm, you forgot to meantion the massive share portfilio which was created by donations and bequests from the public, thinking they were supporting displaced animals…………

    ….The public would like to hear the TRUTH, for the first time

    ….RSPCA NSW need to admit…THEY STUFFED UP and continue to do so…

    ….they need accept the helping hands that are being offered to help the abandoned animals of this state

    ….they MUST put the animals before $$$$

    ….RSPCA NSW needs immediate restructure right to the top levels with people that have a HEART and COMPASSION and who are prepared to listen to the public and put the animals FIRST

  • Mariette Blackmore • 5 days ago

    Dear Ratepayer, Gemma and ‘Qualified Individual’, from your comments, it is obvious that you really have no clue as to what is going on, and also that you really do not care what happens to our companion animals. The people posting here, including me, have been very much involved in animal issues and rescuing from pounds and shelters. I say, “Thank God for Animal Activists!”, they genuinely care abut animals and are doing something about how they are treated. If everthing was left to people like you, animal welfare would still be in the dark ages.

    For your information, NSW RSPCA kills 40% of the dogs that come into its ‘care’. Compare that to a number of council pounds, eg. Wyong, Blacktown, with kill-rates of 10-14%. Ask yourselves, how can these council pounds, without the facilities, the staff, the $$$Milions that the RSPCA has, manage to do that, whereas the RSPCA cannot? It is because they work with small rescue groups, dedicated people, who expend their time, energy and money on saving as many lives as possible.

    There are not so many sick or behaviourally unsound animals as the RSPCA wants you to believe. It is their method of testing animals that is the root of the problem, where dogs are failed for behaving like dogs. These tests are being used incorrectly and are used as an excuse to kill, because that is the easiest way out. Steve Coleman does not want to discuss these tests.

    ‘Qualified Individual’, you have no idea how qualified Ms Greenaway is. She is obviously way more qualified than you for starters.

    • Avatar
      Qualified Individual • 5 days ago • parent

      Ms Greenaway has absolutely no qualifications in medical or behavioural science. One may as well debate a primary school student for all she knows on the topics at hand.

  • David Atwell • 5 days ago

    Why won’t Coleman answer these issues? What has he got to hide? He doesn’t mind going on the Insight SBSTV program, and makes various statements and slandering the rescue groups, so why won’t he debate with them in a free and open encounter?

    The RSPCA have a moral duty toward the public given all the millions in donations which they constantly ask for.

    They also have a legal duty to report to the various councils, which they have contracts with, also worth millions of dollars.

    They also got a $7.5 million grant from the state government which they need to answer for.

    But overall they must be help accountable for what they do whether Coleman likes it or not. If they expect millions in donations, get millions in state government grants, get millions in council contracts, then they have to perform to the public’s expectations.

    Yet with high kill rates exceeding 50%, an inspectorate which makes constant mistakes, a share & investment portfolio of over $30 million, the RSPCA is hardly meeting those public expectations. Police, government departments, corporations, politicans, and everyone else has to answer to someone for their actions. So it’s about time the RSPCA was likewise held accountable for theirs as well.

  • Juta Stokes • 5 days ago

    That the RSPCA releases carefully processed statistics does not make them AT ALL transparent. Mr Coleman is just protecting his own position as he realises that people who actually care what happens to these animals are getting organised and informed.

  • Avatar
    Marg • 5 days ago

    I suggest to the Rate Payer that it’s not the RSPCA that are housing those that are sick dogs and or dogs that have behavioural issues it’s actually the people who opt to adopt from the Rescue Groups. The groups who work hard to place the dogs and cats that the RSPCA put to sleep because they do not pass a “temp test”. I have two of those “so called dogs”. Those so called dogs have a right to a life. Further more RSPCA did educate me….I watched one of their “feel good” programs where they temp tested a dog for 3 weeks, that was dumped in Callan Park and because it did not pass the so called “test” they put it to sleep. It turned me off the RSPCA for LIFE.

  • Avatar
    Vin • 5 days ago

    maybe ratepayer should go to one of the so called shelters and see first hand the number of dogs and cats killed who have nothing wrong with them…His comments are unsubstantiated…. only a small percentage are sick animals or very aggressive.. get your facts right ratepayer before you comment.

  • Avatar
    ruth king • 5 days ago

    why on earth would anyone think the RSPCA would enter in to a debate? They would be stupid to set themselves up for a pie in the face with their very flawed temperament testing. Even country pounds working with rescue groups can get their kill rates to under 5%. You cant convince people that the RSPCA get a much worse class of dog through their doors. scorecard? FAIL

  • Avatar
    loolaa • 5 days ago

    Te RSPCA should be shut down and face a royal commission investigation, Steve Coleman is an absolute disgrace, he does not care about animals great or small all he cares about is the $$ great and small!! I hope this issue keeps gaining momentum until he and his hierarchy cohorts are held accountable for all the needless killings and dollars they have scammed, any other organization with results like this would have been disbanded years ago!! To many fingers in to many pies and pockets. SHAME STEVE COLEMAN!!

  • Caren Halliwell • 5 days ago

    Doesn’t it make sense? He’s seamlessly stopped the public’s interest in being shown the RSPCA ‘temperament test’ and taken the argument straight back to public irresponsibility. Pets aren’t in oversupply, Aussies buy 600,000 pets per year, the RSPCA gets their hands on 250,000. They’re wonderful at avoiding the real issue, they don’t make it easy to reclaim pets. I had a chihuahua for less then 6 hours, he was taken to the RSPCA by the council. I went to the RSPCA in a panic over him(a train and a bus ride with my assist dog and my wheelchair, FUN). He was there for an hour, it cost me $260 to get him back, that’s BEFORE the council fees. He’d had his fur trimmed too, probably so I wouldn’t recognise him, he knew me though! I was told the council had ordered him killed because he wasn’t registered. Not only did they ‘require’ registration within 6 hours, they’d happily kill an ANKC purebred without checking for a microchip…BASTARDS!

  • Avatar
    Marree • 5 days ago

    gutless! Steve Coleman, very disappointing, stand up and dont just duck and weave. Things need to change NOW!

  • Avatar
    Tess • 5 days ago

    More lies from Steve Coleman. We’ve all heard the many horror stories of the RSPCA NSW killing perfectly healthy family pets just for expediency. Open up your coffers Steve Coleman and spend some of your bankroll on a free or cheap desexeing program.

  • Pam Holmes • 5 days ago

    Qualified Individual,

    If what you say is true (I suggest you leave this to the professionals, people who take a level headed approach to the management of these animals) Why not have a debate?, it would be a great opportunity to show rescue in a bad light , line em up and knock em down ( if they can!).
    why not have a debate with a Animal Rescue group who have operated as non kill for many years and rescued and rehomed over 15000 cats and dogs from several “deathrow pounds in rural regions? why not, come on Steve Coleman lets debate with someone who knows every aspect first hand and is one of the “coal face: people who have proven HOW it all should be done and has done it without the huge donations that the RSPCA has at its disposal-just imagine what this group ( and others ) could do with some of that $30 odd million?, Just imagine
    Lets talk turkey!

  • Avatar
    not for profit • 5 days ago

    maybe people should notify the queen & her office, maybe protests as I believe Charles & the missus are coming soon…….and im sure they would hate to lose the “R” in rspca…… maybe the royals could add a little heat to the fire, they arent much good for anything else……

  • Eric • 5 days ago

    Coleman claims, “We aren’t trying to hide from the public…” Then why, Mr. Coleman, are you hiding your policy from the public? I can appreciate not wanting to debate, but the real issue here is the behavioral test the RSPCA is using to determine whether an animal has even a chance to be adopted. Your unwillingness to share that test with the public would indicate to me you are in someway ashamed or embarrassed by it. Don’t forget, Mr. Coleman, you also said, “The RSPCA simply exists because of the public.” The public want answers. The public want disclosure. The public want an answer.

  • Avatar
    compassionkat • 4 days ago

    lI am gratified to hear Steve Coleman, uses the term “..happily and transparently…” it has a nice ring to it. I would like to know the annual salary paid to the CEO of RSPCA NSW. I know you will gladly divulge this information , Steve, all in the spirit of “happily transparenty…”

  • Avatar
    susan hall • 5 days ago

    Rspca please let rescues work with you. They will help save lives of scared pets. They will retrain and desexed the pets and have them returned to society as a well balanced pooch. Please if you love animals you must grow and learn from your mistakes.

  • Avatar
    Michelle101 • 5 days ago

    Mr Coleman should be sacked and a govt enquiry to proceed. It’s time the public heard the truth about the RSPCA, the Lost Dogs Home and the myth!!!

  • Avatar
    Paul Archer • 5 days ago

    Mr Coleman claims that they have programs working on saving lives. Their website certainly shows that….. So why have RSPCA NSW rehome numbers remained more or less static for the past 5 years, with a corresponding high kill statistic?? Programs not working perhaps? What HAS changed is the reported increase in numbers of animals “not rehomable because of illness and behaviour”. This means they can now report a higher percent of rehomed animals (compared to not rehomable) , but the overall kill numbers remain the same. Anne Greenaway has done a great service to the animals of NSW by bringing all this out. If Mr Coleman is so certain of his facts and campaigns , why is he reluctant to an open debate and discussion……that is badly needed.

  • Tegan Whalan • 3 days ago

    Nothing made my skin crawl more than the comment “perhaps Anne could focus her energy and passion into helping to prevent animals from ending up in shelters in the first place”. Mr Coleman needs to get his message straight. I thought animals were being killed at RSPCA NSW because they had “severe behavioural or medical issues”, not because there were too many animals entering the facility. Furthermore, the RSPCA is for “the prevention of cruelty to animals”. My mistake, I thought animals that entered their care would be safe from slaughter. If the RSPCA NSW no longer wants to receive animals, then they should close their shelter doors and let a real, humane, and ethical rescue group help animals that inevitably end up in rescue. If they want to operate a shelter, they need to get with the times, and start doing it right – and by ‘right’ I mean without killing pets for convenience.

  • Christopher Roubis • 4 days ago

    in 2011 NSW RSPCA’s profits were 15 million.. still not enough to rescue animals in need, unless of course the cameras are out.
    Please guys, when the RSPCA refuse to go out and help a poor animal, just mention that you called up the media and they are expecting RSPCA to help.

  • Pam Holmes • 5 days ago

    Just want to question for Steve Coleman-
    RSPCA’s new program ‘DRIVE FOR LIVES’ to assist in the re homing across the state. We believe this program is one of many new damage control measures and apparently follows on from RSPCA NSW contacting small rescue groups around the state! offering to take animals from small rescue that they can’t handle or offer to take animals from a problem area to other NOT problem area or to their shelters for re homing. RSPCA says they have made otherwise ‘unused vehicles’ now be available to move animals around the state, thereby working with rescue groups!
    RSPCA has been asked several times which small rescue groups have agreed to work with you? they say due to confidentiality they can’t say!

    The reality is no-one yet knows of any small rescue group, all mainly No-kill or Low- kill that have or would give their rescued animals over to RSPCA for re homing or allow them to be transferred to another area.

    How can RSPCA offer a ‘Drives for Lives’ program to help other rescue groups around the state save animals when their head office shelter kills over 50% of animals for temp test reasons? This ‘Drives for Lives’ program is yet another RSPCA program created to look good on paper and for media quotes yet means nothing, also look at their programs named ‘LIVING RUFF’ the homeless and ‘Desexing for rural and indigenous areas’ all on paper for the media, yet RSPCA has received grants of approx $45,000 for each such program from relevant government departments. Yet in our North coast NSW region heavily dependent on welfare, none of these RSPCA programs are available for the many homeless people with pets or to help desex animals owned by disadvantaged rural or indigenous people. Many people in crisis have called RSPCA for help from here but are referred to us small groups.

    So RSPCA where are you spending all the public’s animal welfare donations and government grants you receive?

    RSPCA stop conning the public and the government you are not doing your job.

  • Pam Holmes • 5 days ago

    Steve Coleman-as Phillip Wollen has recently said “People with nothing to hide, hide nothing”
    RSPCA-start doing your job of PREVENTING cruelty to animals OR get out of the way because we are sick of doing the work for you AND we don’t get paid for it AND we don’t have a “vested interest ” we just want to stop the killing NOW.
    Well said everyone !!

  • Avatar
    christy • 5 days ago

    we work in unison with rescue groups on cats and we have in our six years of operation not refused to pick up one abandoned or dumped cat and all those cats I am glad to say went to non kill shelters. It is a crime to abandon a cat when you move or sell or just dump your unwanted litters in the bush but dispite numerous occassions were we have the tenant and the cats proof of ownership not once has the RSPCA come out to collect these cats or to prosecution nor have they seen fit to try and education the public by advertisement or other means of media so the dumping keeps going and the small rescues have to pick up.

  • Avatar
    ratepayer • 8 days ago

    Obviously the RSPCA CEO has more important things to do than engage in a televised war of words with Ms Greenaway who is revealing herself to be an animal rights extremist in the first degree.
    Have some commonsense, you can’t just stockpile sick, anti-social and unwanted animals.
    Would you be prepared to house these animals Ms Greenaway? Would you be prepared to feed them and care for them? Would you be prepared to pay for medical treatment when needed?
    I suggest you leave this to the professionals, people who take a level headed approach to the management of these animals.

    • Avatar
      Anne Greenaway • 5 days ago • parent

      By professionals, do you mean the RSPCA in the ACT where they have a 6.5% kill rate for animals, or do you mean Wyong pound (an open admission pound) with a kill rate of around 10%? Have you seen the temp test ratepayer. Obviously not. I have.

      Thankfully this state of affairs has been aired in the Newcastle Herald for over a week. There are a large number of community rescue groups there and people have responded with understandable outrage now this test is all out in the open as well as the high kill rates which are not showing at other open admission facilities.

    • Avatar
      Angel Dust • 5 days ago • parent

      What is more important than saving the lives of innocent animals? Please enlighten me! What makes you think being an animal activist is a *dirty word*, I would think *animal killer* would be something far worse to wear as a label. Rescue groups take in sick and injured animals each day and care for them with their own funds, a far cry from the RSPCA’s multi million dollar donation coffers. And yes, Rescue does feed and care for them, until they find a forever home that is suitable for them. Why not become a foster carer for a Rescue group and see what the grass is like on the other side.

      • Avatar
        Mel Hancock • 5 days ago • parent

        Totally agree Angel. I am a foster carer are I pay for all of the dogs needs with my own money but I take heart that I saved his life and am trying to find him his furever home.

    • Avatar
      Gemma • 7 days ago • parent

      Well said. No doubt Ms Greenaway means well but there are sound reasons for the RSPCAs policies and procedures. The RSPCA does a great job rehousing thousands of animals each year in Dubbo. Perhaps Ms Greenaway should put more effort into the reasons there are so many animals for the RSPCA to deal with eg back yard breeders, dangerous dogs being kept in back yards etc.

      • Eric • 4 days ago • parent

        The argument here, Gemma, is that Coleman and the RSPCA refuse to reveal the specifics of the policies they use to determine whether an animal is “fit” to rehome. Releasing a well-thought out policy that is implemented fairly should not be a problem. The fact that Coleman refuses to release the policy makes it suspect.

      • Avatar
        Paul Archer • 5 days ago • parent

        Yes, she does that as well Gemma

  • Avatar
    Gayl Deveney • 5 days ago

    What a gutless wonder you are Steve Coleman; what are you running from? What have you got to hide? You mouthed off on the SBS Insight program that RSPCA do work with some rescue groups…well then Mr Coleman why haven’t you answered my letters asking for the name of these rescue groups? I do not believe a word that comes out of your mouth; if in fact you do work with rescue groups I believe that they would appreciate the publicity. So what are you hiding? You are a heartless piece of work and your only concern is the $$$$. The public should demand an answer from you and your “friends” about the why you use the temp test which is set up to fail nearly every dog. Is it just easier for you to kill them and get them out of the way instead of showing them some tlc and rehab if needed. I have a small 6 year old dog that doesn’t return the ball to me…that’s 20 points against him, I believe!!! I actually did the whole test with him, placing him a strange, cold, uncaring pound situation. He scored 264 points Mr Coleman so I suppose you would kill him!! Tell me, are you afraid of debating with Annie Greenaway because you know what she will uncover? Be a man, wipe that stupid smirk off your face and have an HONEST debate….the public and the ANIMALS deserve this!!!

  • Avatar
    Qualified Individual • 5 days ago

    Why would anyone want to debate Ms Greenaway on an area in which she has no expertise? Even the thought of such a debate is ludicrous. If a suitable person with recognised qualifications requested a debate it might be a different matter altogether. It’s little wonder this proposition will never be entertained.

    • Avatar
      Tee Kay • 5 days ago • parent

      Anne Greenaway is a lawyer with Lawyers For Companion Animals so I think that makes her qualified.

    • Avatar
      Anne Greenaway • 5 days ago • parent

      No expertise? I don’t think so. I have an economics degree, a law degree, and got HD’s in statistics at University. I have read a number of articles on temperament testing and am in regular contact with academics, dog trainers and rescue groups who work at the coal face. What a shame since you are so “qualified” you don’t have the courage to post under your own name. The only thing you seem qualified for is “stirring the pot”.

    • Leanne Cork • 5 days ago • parent

      Qualified Individual, Anne Greenaway has more expertise in this matter than you give her credit for. The temperament test is causing the death of good healthy animals. Steve Coleman says the RSPCA is transparent, yet he hasn’t got the balls to debate. What is he scared of ?

    • Avatar
      Orlando Browning • 5 days ago • parent

      Anne Greenaway is one of the most qualified persons to debate this issue. She is a Lawyer for Companion Animals, a person of impressive intellectual ability, and she is compassionate towards the plight of companion animals. What are Steve Coleman’s qualifications, besides, being known for the mass kill-rate of dogs and cats at the RSPCA?

      • Avatar
        Qualified Individual • 5 days ago • parent

        Ms Greenaway has ZERO qualifications in behavioural or medical science yet she wants to debate on those topics. What a waste of time. The only possible purpose a debate would serve is to foster Ms Greenaway’s attention seeking behaviour. End of debate.

    • Avatar
      Mel Hancock • 5 days ago • parent

      Then who would be qualified? You? Annie puts herself out there and states who she is and what she stands for. You, Qualified Individual stand behind an alias and do not state what your qualifications are. Are you with the RSPCA??? Who are you?

    • Avatar
      Kate Sidonie • 5 days ago • parent

      The proposition was not entertained, because, Steve Coleman does not want the truth about the temp. tasts, and the high kill-rates revealed. Anne Greenaway is a Lawyer for Companion Animals, with extensive knowledge in the area of animal rescue. I wonder about the CV of Qualified Individual.

  • Avatar
    Nicola Smith • 2 days ago

    If we’re going to debate qualifications, it’s probably quite telling that Coleman’s qualifications are in business administration. Guess he needs that to manage all the millions, to organise propaganda and to hide from the tough questions. Let’s see the temperament test in full …

    • Avatar
      Qualified individual • a day ago • parent

      Quite an appropriate qualification for him to hold given his position one would think. Ms Greenaway would be qualified to represent in court of law, not debate behaviour policy with a business executive. What would a debate between this pair achieve? Most with any common sense realise that all Ms Greenaway is doing is seeking attention. She would be much better served by volunteering her services to perform additional behavioural assessments once she acquires a relative qualification to do so.

  • Avatar
    Gayl • 5 days ago

    Show your face Steve Coleman…where are you hiding?

  • Avatar
    Charlotte • 5 days ago

    Why is the RSPCA refusing to debate this issue? The public do not want to see the “warts and all” continuing Mr Coleman. We want the killing to stop. You should be ashamed that your kill rate is so high. It is time you left and a new compassionate commited management team run the RSPCA. You are continuing to tarnish the RSPCA whilst you remain.

  • Avatar
    Stop factory farming! • 5 days ago

    I agree puppy and kitten farming is a disgrace. We need more laws to prevent this and serious consequences for mistreatment of animals. Factory faming of any animal should be banned. RSPCA should not run from an opprtunity to raise awareness and increase community confidence. Tail between your legs perhaps? Not 100% your fault. And attaking the RSPCA is not the answer ether.

  • Linda White • 5 days ago

    Well the RSPCA in South Australia is failing even worse. They fail to work with rescue groups here in South Australia. They will not work with Lost Dogs of Adelaide facebook page to help reunite pets with their owners. These are simple and effective strategies to help reduce the no of companion animals put to sleep every day. I have to wonder…have they forgotten what they are there for???

  • Avatar
    compassionkat • 5 days ago

    Steve Coleman, says, ” RSPCA NSW is aways open to improvements…” the debate would have given Steve a chance to discuss possible improvements. A zero-kill policy would be a great improvement for all the animals in Steve’s dubious care, another improvement would be a new CEO for RSCPA NSW.

 

]]> Gypsy rescue set up? https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/hhh/ Thu, 25 Oct 2012 09:28:02 +0000 http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1126 Author: By MICHELLE HOCTOR
Date: 12/11/2009 Publication: Illawarra Mercury
Section: News

THE RSPCA has rejected concerns the rescue of a stranded dog on Lake Illawarra may have been prolonged for the sake of a reality television show.

Ten-year-old pure-bred boxer Gypsy was trapped on Bevans Island for 10 weeks before her rescue in a highly emaciated state on Monday, the drama captured by the Seven Network’s RSPCA Animal Rescue.

Two weeks earlier, an approach was made by NSW Police to rescue the dog, however the offer was not followed through by the RSPCA.

Gypsy and her companion Princess, an 11-year-old Maltese terrier, were trapped on the island for two weeks before being discovered – but it was already too late for Princess, who had died.

Gypsy’s carer Greta Bush said the family had been frantic Gypsy would also die.

Mrs Bush said the RSPCA had tried to trap the dog on two occasions with a cage, the second attempt discontinued after six days because Gypsy refused to enter the cage to eat the bait and was slowly starving.

She said the family was alarmed when told the RSPCA inspector would be returning to the island on Monday for a third attempt with the cage.

Mrs Bush said Gypsy’s vet had also expressed concern about the length of time it took to rescue the dog, saying it could have been managed by placing tranquilliser pellets in her food or water.

Mrs Bush said she was sceptical about the television crew’s presence coinciding with the rescue.

“I think it was planned,” she said.

RSPCA NSW operations manager Matt French said communication took place between the RSPCA and other agencies before they opted to work with the SES.

Mr French said the RSPCA was unable to sedate the dog’s water as she could not be supervised if she consumed the drug and ran into bushland.

“A very large amount of time, resources and energy were dedicated to capturing Gypsy and our efforts to successfully trap her were made frustratingly difficult by attempts of other persons to capture her; there was a substantial amount of food being left outside the trap by well intentioned persons,” he said.

“Once those issues were resolved, Gypsy was caught very quickly.

“RSPCA officers do their utmost with the resources available at all times. No officer would ever prolong the suffering of an animal,” he said.

RSPCA Animal Rescue series producer Ross Wilson said his crew followed RSPCA inspectors in their line of duty and never interfered with their work.

 http://newsstore.fairfax.com.au/apps/viewDocument.ac?page=1&sy=nstore&kw=RSPCA&pb=ill&dt=selectRange&dr=5years&so=relevance&sf=text&sf=headline&rc=10&rm=200&sp=nrm&clsPage=1&docID=ILL091112E84GS1ULC52

]]> DOG WHISPERER CRITICISES RSPCA POLICY https://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/mmm/ Wed, 24 Oct 2012 12:16:23 +0000 http://lawyersforcompanionanimals.com.au/?p=1120 NBN NEWS

DOG WHISPERER CRITICISES RSPCA POLICY

September 1, 2010 at 5:45 pm

 

The RSPCA has come under fire from a dog rehabilitation expert, for adopting a new policy.

Nathan Barnes claims the guidelines will result in more animals being euthanased, but the RSPCA says that’s not the case.

 http://www.nbnnews.com.au/index.php/2010/09/01/dog-whisperer-criticises-rspca-policy/

http://soulstream1.sptel.com.au/NBN_News/dogwhisperer.wmv

3 Responses to “DOG WHISPERER CRITICISES RSPCA POLICY”

  1. Olga Parkes on September 21st, 2010 11:12 am

I am concerned about this new RSPCA policy. Some dogs require a longer period with someone like Nathan, some less. I think any dog rescue organisation would agree.I think the RSPCA needs to provide evidence re dogs taken back into the Shelter after a period of socialisation with a carer. How many got homes as a result of behaviour modification. How many were killed. And why.We are a long way behind the UK Dogs Trust, where NO dogs are killed. They are re-homed or they are very well looked after at a Dogs Trust facility for life.

  1. Daniel on October 13th, 2010 10:52 am

I have seen Nathans work, I have worke with Nathan. The RSPCA does not know the animals like Nathan does, The RSPCA staff are just people looking for a pay check, Nathan has a genuine interest in saving and training animals

  1. pam holmes on March 16th, 2011 6:07 pm

For far to long the RSPCA has been a law unto its self, wasteing huge amounts of money and they should be made accountable.People donate to the RSPCA in the believe that they save animals, they do save some, BUT many, many more are killed that are rehomable.Thousands of dogs and cats are rescued and rehomed by small groups of people and IMO they do what the RSPCA fails to do year in and year out.

Put some of their many millions ( 17.000 000 public donations) in doing wide spread desexing, shutting down puppy mills and saving the animals that they exist for.

But would they put themselved out of a job, me thinks NOT.

 

 

 

]]>