Concerns Over Conditions In Rescues\boarding Kenels\other Establishments

[Allie No Dots]

sorry, back...something i cant quite get my head around.

 

To discuss such a topic on an internet forum is even odder than i first thought. (not this topic but a topic about "bad practice")

 

You would have to name the place which, if you beleive, to be doing something wrong is surley not a good idea right? I know i wanted to do summit on our site which would include rescues and say which ones neuter/hc ect but then that works the other way and those who just want to buy a dog would go where they didnt get a hc. So we didnt bother.

 

By naming it does the opposite of what you hope to acheive. But if you dont name them you end up with a topic of *Person we cant say"* of *place we cant mention* has done this that and the other. That just leaves everyone confused.

 

 

So yep, thinking like that, it cant be worth it surley?!

[JoC]

This is a general, theoretical repsonse and not aimed at any current situation

 

I don't think it's a choice of 'report to authorities' OR 'post on a forum', I think both have their uses. If there was a rescue near me that I was very unhappy with, I would report it to anyone I could, but I would also want to make other people aware of the problem and hopefully stop them going there.

 

There is a boarding kennels near me that are not very good, they're not cruel as such but I don't want to put my dogss in there. I do tell people that I had a bad experience with them, because I don't want others to have the same experience.

[Pingu]

sorry, back...something i cant quite get my head around.

 

To discuss such a topic on an internet forum is even odder than i first thought. (not this topic but a topic about "bad practice")

 

You would have to name the place which, if you beleive, to be doing something wrong is surley not a good idea right? I know i wanted to do summit on our site which would include rescues and say which ones neuter/hc ect but then that works the other way and those who just want to buy a dog would go where they didnt get a hc. So we didnt bother.

 

By naming it does the opposite of what you hope to acheive. But if you dont name them you end up with a topic of *Person we cant say"* of *place we cant mention* has done this that and the other. That just leaves everyone confused.

 

 

So yep, thinking like that, it cant be worth it surley?!

 

i *think* i know aht you mean.. and if i do i agree

[Allie No Dots]

There is a boarding kennels near me that are not very good, they're not cruel as such but I don't want to put my dogss in there. I do tell people that I had a bad experience with them, because I don't want others to have the same experience.

 

 

Nowt wrong with telling people who may be thinking of going there.

 

Pingu, free advertising of summit you beleive to be wrong. ....that was a bit easier to understand eh?!lol

 

Certain free ads sites i hate, so dont mention. if i tried to mention without actually naming the site in particular, no one would know which one i meant. Hence the confusion and still not getting anywhere.

 

One free ads site i sit on when i have time reporting every post i can get my hands on and watching as they vanish. Mentioning the site here however, wouldnt help much.

[BillyMalc]

I have reported dog owners, who I thought mistreated their dogs, to both the dog warden and the RSPCA. The first one was an utter waste of time - the lady taking the report on the phone could not be bothered listening to the answers to her questions, and kept asking the same questions over and over again: "what kind of dog is it?" "It's a black GSD". "Oh. What colour is it?" "Black". "Oh. What type of dog is it?" Aaaaaaarggghhh! The RSPCA seemed helpful at first until they heard where it was, then they wanted me to go and investigate whether the bloke in question was violent!

So no, I've not got much faith in the 'relevant organisations'.

 

Having said that, I guess they are the only ones who could bring about change for these animals, so going on and on and on at them seems to be the only option. In case of individuals I have tried befriending them and talk to them about their dog's needs. If anything, with a lot of luck, they'd contact me if they want to get rid of their dog. In one case that's how I ended up with Kiera

[JACKYSIAN]

If I knew from first hand experience that somewhere was bad I'd report to the RSPCA, Local council, Dog wardens etc etc. I would not be anonymous either and I'd be constantly ringing for an outcome.

What I would not do [though have in the past] is take other peoples word as gospel. If I didn't have first hand experience I'd make sure I visited and saw for myself. THEN I'd report.

If the authorities came back and said they were happy with conditions, I dont see what else you could do really.

 

What she said!

[Ian]

a current topic and one worth discussing IMO.........................

 

For me I think it depends on a variety of things - what you would like to achieve, what support that might require to achieve, what evidence is available and sadly perhaps what past experience you have of the relevant authorities.

 

There are at least three recent threads (two were here, one has only run elsewhere as far as I'm aware) and situations, where your comments on libel may possibly be relevant (though from some of the comments above it may be that there are others that I'm unaware of).

 

Whilst I'm not a libel expert it would however be fair to say that there are legal defences available to accusations of libel and you are entitled to comment on matters of public interest, providing that your comments are factually based and you do so without malicous intent.

 

In my opinion if you had factual evidence of something re the above situations there would be nothing wrong in commenting upon that evidence.

 

Whether you would be wise to do so however, would perhaps depend on various factors. Examples might be whether you had tried the authorities already and whether they had declined to act (I would then say it my possible be wise) or whether they were in fact actually still making more discreet enquiries (in which case you may well unknowingly jeopardise their efforts)

 

 

If however you have no evidence and you merely speculate on a situation, make assumptions based upon general situations that could apply, or rely on friends opinions then you may risk being sued if these matters prove to be incorrect.

 

Whether you should act on a one off situation might perhaps depend on the seriousness of the accusation. If for example, I found that a man living nearby had left a dog without adequate shelter / water on one occasion I might well try to discuss it with him not call the RSPCA. If he did the same thing twice, or refused to speak to me / dismissed my legitimate concerns on that 1st occasion then I'd call the RSPCA.

 

I have to say however that I can understand why people are reluctant or feeling doings so to be a "waste of time". I did contact the RSPCA a few months back about a dog which it appeared had been virtually starved whilst also being recently bred from, where I wasn't 100% sure whether these people had sold the puppies or not etc. I was warned, by others, I would be wasting my time but I could not accept that. I first contacted the nearest branch with a picture of the said dog. Despite admitting this dog was clearly not well instead of immediately passing this to an inspector a volunteer spent time writing a fairly lengthy reply about why they could do nothing (contrary to the stated objectives which they file with The Charity Commission they did not deal with cruelty I would have to ring the National cruelty line. Also asking what they could be expected to do without all of the evidence etc. I'm afraid when I replied I explained that the meaning of investigation and that it was not me doing their job for them. I also suggested that perhaps what they could do was "get somebody off their backside and actually go and see the poor dog for themselves, followed by asking the questions instead they wanted instead of waiting for me to provide all of the answers)

 

I also did that. I also complained in writing to the Charity (copied to their Trustee) and the RSPCA Head Office about the statements made, the contradictions between these and the basis that branch was fundraising upon / what was filed with the Charity Commission. This happened approximately three months ago off the top of my head.

 

To date I have not had the courtesy of a response from anyone at the RSPCA Head Office or branches.

 

I contacted The Charity Commission, via their website, receiving a standard reply in my opinion asking me to do their job for them as well.

 

Would I contact them again. Well I have done so recently, with regard to the Flexpetz proposal and whether they intend to comment, also suggesting that I trust they will have the courtesy to at least reply this time, unlike that one but time will tell whether my perceptions are improved or whether I conclude contacting them further on anything is a complete waste of time

 

 

Would I post on a forum? Yes, quite possibly if I felt that the evidence was strong enough and it was not detrimental to any invetsigations that may be underway. The benefit of the forum is perhaps that public become aware and can decide to look at the situation more closely where appropriate.

 

 

It is a fact that many places are not great, puppy farms ect are often hell on earth. But we have a choice, either we can keep moaning or get off our backsides and do summit productive. Bit like BSL, Dont like the law, try and get it changed. Dont know if you dont try, but if you dont try you wont ever get anywhere.

 

For me this is perhaps part of the what you hope to achieve.

 

I sposting about BSL a case of wasting your time posting on a forum that isn't able / going to change the law? Or, is it a case of getting off your backside, doing summit productive and enlisting support from like minded people in an effort to achieve the aim of changing the law?

 

A rhetorical question but an example which others may feel applies equally to their own situations.

 

One thing that does worry me is that rescue people often get regarded by non dog people as a bunch of rescue nuts if not handeled properly i think it could be damaging all round.

 

 

"If not handled properly" - I think that's the key. If you generally reasoned I think people will respect that you may have differeing opinions on some topics. If everything you say (not you personally, just whoever is typing / speaking) is extreme then I think it's that sort of thing which rubs people up the wrong way & makes them brand all dog lovers as "rescue nuts"

[Pingu]

^^^

 

good post.

[Abigailj]

I do however have very little faith in RSPCA etc in bringing about any changes, due to there hands being tied by legislation.

Likewise. I can think of an example where nothing has been done. (not a 'rescue' that posts on this board, or any other board that I am aware of.)

[Ian]

I think it boils down to that folk working or helping in rescue circles recieve so many complaints from people who have tried the first avenue of the R.S.P.C.A and see nothing is being done end up being frustrated. The animal welfare bill doesnt seem to have gone far enough. The people put in charge ie R.S.P.C.A need more government money or spend some of the savings they have to train up many more inspectors and have a great deal more powers to act

 

 

Whilst to be fair I think some branches could genuinely use more money when it comes to cruelty & the national body I'm not personally convinced that money is an issue. A look at The Charity Commission website will reveal accounts for The RSPCA with the latest on there showing them to have investments in excess of 90 million pounds (that isn't their necessary properties) it's investments which they liquidise any time they choose. If your sceptical that this is the case figures are available here http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/regis...bmit=Run+Search

[Sherlock Bones]

Whilst to be fair I think some branches could genuinely use more money when it comes to cruelty & the national body I'm not personally convinced that money is an issue. A look at The Charity Commission website will reveal accounts for The RSPCA with the latest on there showing them to have investments in excess of 90 million pounds (that isn't their necessary properties) it's investments which they liquidise any time they choose. If your sceptical that this is the case figures are available here http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/regis...bmit=Run+Search

 

A bit OT but just to point out Ian, local branches are totally independent (other than the constitution that they promote) from HQ and Inspectors are employed by HQ not the local branches and thus cruelty is dealt with by them. In effect the local RSPCAs that you see have absolutely no financial link to the funds that you highlight there and are charities in their own right with their own fundraising budgets. Of course the HQ could pass down some of their funds to the local ones but they have no obligation to do so nor do the local ones have the right to demand it.

[owl]

As I am involved in something really urgent today I haven't time to give this subject the careful response it deserves, but I will say that I and many others have been trying to improve conditions at a local rescue for several years now and have found the RSPCA unhelpful because the local officers haven't a clue, the council won't make waves, the Charity Commission took months to agree to act (yes, you have to do all their work for them) and have few teeth when they do, the local police obstructive and various individuals either easily influenced or corrupt. The rescue was then sold to friends of the owners who promptly fell out with them to no one's surprise, and now the place is even worse. There is no overcrowding because they take few dogs in, but it is a moneymaking project run by people who know nothing about animals and care less. No neutering, no vaxing. Dogs have been rehomed with KC and severely underweight, we have vet reports from adopters which would make your hair stand on end, we have proof that these people dumped all their resident ancient feral cats up the mountain, no homechecks and they don't ask for - or want - unsuccessful adoptions to be returned, and because the local RSPCA officer says he is satisfied we now have to fight further up the line.

 

No, I do not have confidence in anything a RSPCA officer may say unless I have good evidence that the particular officer has got some sense and some courage. This is as a result of my own personal experience.

 

This is not a rescue which has been openly discussed on the Refuge but I have discussed it elsewhere simply to warn people that dogs coming from there should be thoroughly vet checked and to say no dog or other animal should go there.

[Trallwm farm]

I am aware that in one recent case the RSPCA were informed I am thinking in more general terms.

sounds similar to sonmethingthat happened near us not that long ago.

 

I guess another aspect to this is "if the authorities are informed would you trust them to act properly.

 

Given the option I STILL would take the authority option rather than taking the word of often tin pot lunatics just out to cause aggro .

The authorities should always be the first port of call as it instantly identifies if there IS a problem. Sadly peoples lies and campaigns reflect on all good rescues genuinely trying to get help for animals but that is something they have caused and wont give a second thought to.

[Kats inc]

Had a concern reported to myself and after discussion on the right way to handle it I asked the reportee to report her concerns to the RSPCA and myself and Di went and had a look at the actual place.I also spoke to the local dog warden and environmental health.Di & I went,had a look,felt the place did the best it could under very difficult circumstances as their policy was a no destruct one.Reduced our concern level enormously and that put the matter to bed.We didn't ever post openely about it on the forum as there seemed little point until we knew one way or another and I think that was the right way to handle things.On reflection I think it was handled well.It could so easily have been blown out of all proportion and as we'd all had experience of that very thing happening we were determined that history would not repeat itself.

 

Thank you to those that helped me when I needed the advice and support of people more knowlegable than myself

Edited August 9, 2007 by Kats inc

[Red Rotties]

But at which point do you become a "dog rescue nut"?

 

At which point do you decide to make the public aware of things that are going wrong?

 

When do you gain the respect of your peers for them to believe what you are telling them when you tell them what YOU saw?

 

People didnt believe what was happening to pets and greyhounds at one of our local dogs homes until a highly respected newspaper took over the story (dont think it would have had the same impact in the sun!)

 

I know different folk have different standards and ideals, for instant I know folk that are frustrated the not all rescues neuter, we are fortunate in the North West to have the Dogs Trust to help us so up here that should be the norm, down south is a different matter where neutering is very expensive so cant always be done, but if a rescue does very thorough home checks for their dogs it doesnt worry me the same.

 

One of the pounds is horrid, its dark and dank, no runs on kennels, the worse I have seen, yet the wardens drive around in fabulous new vans, that was where the council spent their monies. One could complain but then you talk to the staff and they are lovely and doing the best they can, all committed animal lovers and you know that although the animals are kept in less than ideal conditions the care they get whilst there is high

 

Rambling I know, it is all in my head what I want to say but it only trickles down to my finger tips