cheryl33 Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 tahnk you snow - this is what I tried to say on DP today No rescue is perfect and I am sure this is a lesson for all of them. and for those who were wondering, I read the Sun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helly Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 Im very sad that people are accusing us of thinking everything is ok and the past doesnt matter. No where have i said the kennels are great and they dont smell so everything is bloody marvellous and sick and dead dogs are not important but that is how im being portrayed elsewhere. what happened in the past matters very much, but now is the time to make sure those mistakes are not repeated and work towards making milll somewhere for dogs to get a second chance from the pound and stray environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
border collie Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 and time for me to point out clearly that no one has said "forgive and forget" no one has said the dogs that died "don't matter" and no one has said that what went on before was acceptable, what has been said most clearly is that it does not help save dogs lives to close down rescues that are making efforts to ensure past mistakes are not repeated. Im very sad that people are accusing us of thinking everything is ok and the past doesnt matter. No where have i said the kennels are great and they dont smell so everything is bloody marvellous and sick and dead dogs are not important but that is how im being portrayed elsewhere. what happened in the past matters very much, but now is the time to make sure those mistakes are not repeated and work towards making milll somewhere for dogs to get a second chance from the pound and stray environment. I was going to keep out of this but have to say thankyou to both of you for confirming (in a roundabout way) that dogs died, and that conditions were unacceptable. I believed Catherine and Lisa's account of how it was and was uncomfortable thinking that they were being thought of as not telling the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mop Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 Im very sad that people are accusing us of thinking everything is ok and the past doesnt matter. No where have i said the kennels are great and they dont smell so everything is bloody marvellous and sick and dead dogs are not important but that is how im being portrayed elsewhere. You know the truth and that is what matters not what others say, sticks and stones and all that. You live with your own conscious, let them live with theirs. payback day will come eventually. You can't do anything about them or what they say, but you can hold your head up high, which is more than they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helly Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 i couldnt agree with you more border collie. reading 50 odd pages of people making judgements based on what 2 people had said made me so uncomfortable i got off my arse and went to see for myself. My main hope was that i would find a rescue who was making every effort to change, improve and learn and thankfully thats what i found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maria Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 As someone who was less 'concerned' with 'conditions', but more concerned with what appeared to be unnecessary suffering and death (and which some seemed to think were only rumours and lies), then I do welcome the fact that this has been acknowledged here as being unacceptable in the past . The only comments I have seen (but I may have missed some), were along the lines of 'we all make mistakes' and 'the past is the past', which did seem incongruous with comments I saw when dogs died / became ill as a result of their seizure by the police in Liverpool.... Yes the past is the past, and we do all make mistakes, but hopefully not many that result in illness or death........,and lets face it, sometimes we do have to face the consequences of our (in)actions / mistakes.... Is it therefore not reasonable to ask whether where these mistakes /outcomes have been acknowledged,that the people who had genuine grievances have been contacted to say that mistakes were indeed made, reparation (where possible) has been offered, their questions answered and reassurances somehow given to them that no-one else will experience what they did? Surely that is the least that should happen in those cases?........and I have to say would be the crux of the matter for someone like me if I'd experienced it. Tis no good admitting that serious mistakes were made to a third party, without communicating that and making amends where possible to very people who were on the receiving end....... Were those who visited also offered to be / actually put in contact with those with acknowledged grievances, so that their stories' could be considered too (I am unaware if they are members here), before any balanced opinions of competence was formed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
border collie Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 There were more than 2 people's accounts though, there were first hand accounts off people who had bought dogs from MR. It was their accounts that were probably the most upsetting to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wendbert Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 I don't get the constant reference to 'buying' dogs In that case, every rescue sells dogs, unless they give them away for free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raiye Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 I don't get the constant reference to 'buying' dogs In that case, every rescue sells dogs, unless they give them away for free I would say most rescues do practically give dogs away. The "price" is usually enough to cover vaxinations and nuetering. And sometimes travel expenses for homecheckers. Are these "services" now being offered at MR ? Talking as being a homer rather than a rescue. When a possible home comes available that isnt quite up to standard, they are left dogless until standards have reached said level. Though the potential is there, its not until the potential has been reached that they can become new owners. Then - I suppose- considering one of the rescues I trust to do these homechecks is Gap, I trust Lisas opinions and standards. I get to stay on my arse and trust what Lisa says. If the situation was turned slightly and MR were applying to other rescues to rehome, do you think they would be up to standard, or would you wait to see if they fixed everything first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melp Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 Liverpool has got NOTHING whatsoever to do with this so please keep the thread on track but if you want to start a thread on those particular dogs please do so No-one can force Maggi to post anywhere on the internet but she is free to do so on this board if she wishes. I have no idea if the people who adopted dogs which later died are members here or not but they would be welcome to post if they wanted to. I understand 2 dogs died? if it's more than that please correct me. Whilst it is totally unacceptable to deliberatly send out sick or dying dogs, has anyone actually ever proved that this is what Maggi did? I find it incredibly difficult to believe that someone would hold an open day where ANYONE could visit if she deliberatly ran a dog dealership or deliberatly had poor conditions/sick animals etc. Surely this is more a case of ignorance and biting off more than she could chew than deliberate intention to mislead/cause deaths/rake in money? I do not doubt that conditons at Mill were not as good as they could be, but I also know that other rescues are less than ideal. I wonder of some of those would be treated with the same level of contempt on DP if those issues came to light? I also know that £150 is a figure other rescues charge for their dogs, even those that have been unneutered sometimes. Some of them don't homecheck either particularly when they *know* the potential adopter from a forum. Shock horror, lets hang them all! Again, no-one can force Maggi to post or respond to anyone. It would be good manners to reply to those who have been personally affected but neither us, or DP can make her do anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoots Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 Indeed and if any of you care to take a look at the very long threads regarding Mill Rescue on DP you will see at least 2 of the moderators say that Maggi was NOT ABLE TO POST. Even if she'd wanted to, she wasn't able to, just as others were moderated, so was/is she.People miss little things like that when they're only paying attention to the nastiness. That's not true, Mel. Maggi is and has always been able to post on DP. She just can't advertise her dogs there. Anyone who says otherwise is, quite simply, wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maria Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 Liverpool has got NOTHING whatsoever to do with this so please keep the thread on track but if you want to start a thread on those particular dogs please do so I agree it is not directly related, but there is an analogy with this situation, in that dogs suffered as a result of mistakes made. I was just making the point that many felt that that situation was unacceptable,(and some suggested suing), but not so many in this case for some reason. I understand 2 dogs died? if it's more than that please correct me. Whilst it is totally unacceptable to deliberatly send out sick or dying dogs, has anyone actually ever proved that this is what Maggi did? I honestly don't know how many dogs actually died, I have only read what others have experienced (but obviously I have not personally witnessed what they say). However, it has been said here that the rescue concerned have admitted that mistakes were made and dogs died, so if they themselves have admitted mistakes and death, is any more proof needed? It would be good manners to reply to those who have been personally affected but neither us, or DP can make her do anything. This is really the nub of it for me...if you can admit you made (serious) mistakes to a third party, and really want to improve welfare wise, then surely you would go to those previously affected and admit to past failings, try to repair where repairs can be made, and say sorry even -can go a long way-, as a way of demonstrating how things will be different in the future. I have no reason to doubt the experience and integrity of those who have recently inspected the premises, but asked if they were put in contact with people who it was acknowledged had genuine grievances, to ensure a balanced view. Even at my age I still have some faith in human nature , and people can change if they really want to......and knowing that people affected by the past had been contacted for explanations etc would go some way to reassure that things in the future could only get better imho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherlock Bones Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 That's not true, Mel. Maggi is and has always been able to post on DP. She just can't advertise her dogs there. Anyone who says otherwise is, quite simply, wrong. And that, sadly, isn't true either. Maggi is able to post NOW but was banned very early on in the attacks on her. She wanted to respond but couldn't. handy huh. I wouldnl't blame her for not wanting to go there now and post either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helly Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 That's not true, Mel. Maggi is and has always been able to post on DP. She just can't advertise her dogs there. Anyone who says otherwise is, quite simply, wrong. if you take a look in your own help section on dp, the moderating post, august 8th one of dp mods says maggi is not on premod as of now. does that not imply she was prior to that date? Maggi told me herself she had been unable to post any sort of reply. I had no reason to disbeleive her, and when bevd said her premod was now lifted i took that as confirmation she had previously been restricted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trudi Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 I would have thought that the welfare of the animals was of paramount importance, not a stupid board war that always degenerates into 'he said she said'. Neither board is more important than the dogs and sometimes putting ego's aside and working toward a common goal ( which I think there is) should be a uniting not dividing force Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts