Changes to VIC code of practice for shelters (and why you should care)

There is just 30 days to comment on changes to the Code of Practice for the Management of Dogs and Cats in Shelters and Pounds.

From the DPI e-Newsletter:

Code of Practice (Revision Number 1)

For your information – the Minister gave notice today 31 March 2011 of the proposal to make the Code of Practice for the Management of Dogs and Cats in Shelters and Pounds (Revision Number 1) and announced a call for public submissions for a period of 28 days as required by s.60 of the Domestic Animals Act 1994.

The current Code of Practice has been in place since November 1998 and has been recently reviewed by the Department with the assistance of industry stakeholders. The primary objective of this review and public consultation is to provide for agreed minimum standards for the accommodation, management and care appropriate to the needs of dogs and cats housed in shelters and pounds.

Public submissions are invited on the proposed Code of Practice for the Management of Dogs and Cats in Shelters and Pounds (Revision Number 1) and must be provided in writing.

This new Code is nearly identical to the proposal that was leaked last year to great criticism from the wider rescue industry and the public. At that time, in response to the intensely negative feedback, the Code was quickly shelved. What is interesting *this* time is that despite the promise that there would be big changes made in the re-writing of this legislation before it was resubmitted, Victoria is still at risk of having the same majorly flawed legislation passed.

Compared to the existing Code, the new Code has some significant changes which seem to be designed to cripple both independent rescue and foster groups, and restrict the life saving programs of large shelters to the point where programs become unworkable. In the ultimate effort of ‘legislating the status quo’; the DPI has further expanded pound’s capacity to kill, protection for pounds and shelters from community backlash about killing and even continued to mandate killing – further reducing protection for pets in what is already a failing pound system.

Intakes

Just as the previous COP gave free reign to pounds and shelters to deem cats ‘feral’ and immediately kill them, the new code maintains the same lack of protection;

(2.2) Admission: Every animal admitted to the establishment must be examined by a veterinary practitioner or by an experienced person, who is responsible for classifying the animals into the health status (table 1) for appropriate action:

Table 1 – Health status and appropriate action to be taken upon admission

In regional locations, this means cats can be shot with a firearm, while in city shelters it allows unchipped cats to be disposed of immediately without offering owners, the community or rescue groups an opportunity to act to save them. To be building such ‘extermination’ powers into animal management plans in 2010, is staggeringly counter intuitive to animal protection.

This is especially revolting given that of the 14 highly restricted seats on the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AWAC), (of which only 3 are held by ‘animal rescue’ organisations) one is held by Dr Carole Webb of the Cat Protection Society. With a 91% kill rate for the nearly 12,500 cat intakes at the organisation, protection for shelters from public criticism over killing seems to be a higher priority than lobbying to protect cats from a mandated or even violent death.

Releasing to rescue

(2.6) Euthanasia or removal of an animal from the establishment: At the conclusion of the statutory period specified in the Domestic Animals Act 1994 for seized or surrendered animals, animals must be:
– rehomed to a new owner, or
– euthanased because of disease, injury, behaviour, age, unsuitability for sale, or
– placed in appropriate foster care and returned at an appropriate date for rehoming, or
– released under a written agreement to a person or body which operates in accordance with the Act to care for and dispose of the animal, at the discretion of the operations manager or veterinary practitioner.

There are two options for ‘rescue’ to access a pet under this new directive; either the rescuer is a foster carer for the pound or shelter (more on that below), or the group is authorised under the Domestic Animals Act 1994. The Act makes no reference to private or individual rescue groups, only specifying ‘domestic animal businesses’ – which most rescue groups are not:

“domestic animal business means— (a) an animal shelter, Council pound or pet shop; or an enterprise that is run for profit which carries out all or any of the following activities— (i) the breeding of dogs or cats, (ii) the rearing, training or boarding of dogs or cats”.

As private rescue groups (foster care, individual rescues etc) don’t so much as rate a mention in the Act, rescue groups could well be refused access on the basis of them not being a ‘domestic animal businesses’. Essentially putting all relationships between pounds and local rescue and foster groups in breach of the new legislation.

This is obviously a boon for pounds and shelters who would rather have the protection of this legislation to kill pets at will, than work with local groups to save them. It is also a bonus for those pounds and shelters who often kill for ‘space’ during busy times like Christmas and NYE’s celebrations; with a way to block access by community rescue groups working in a volunteer capacity (ie. not registered as a Domestic Animal Business), pounds can continue to kill due to ‘overpopulation’ without consequence.

Foster care

There is a whole new section on foster care. This applies specifically to the foster carers of ‘animal shelters and pounds‘, but with no provision for private foster organisations, that may be the only foster care left able to legally operate.

Foster care is highly restricted and not able to be used simply to ‘make space’ or save lives;

(2.8) Foster care: This section provides minimum standards for the operation of foster care conducted by establishments. The only time an animal can be placed in foster care is on the grounds of juvenile, veterinary rehabilitation or behavioural rehabilitation foster care.

Instead it must be for the purpose of ‘rehabilitation’, includes strict veterinary and reporting requirements and is generally being considered an extension of pound process, rather than an important community service that moves pets directly from home to home;

The animals placed in foster care must be permanently identified by microchip and they remain the property of the establishment. Animals in foster care must be returned to the establishment for rehoming as foster care must not be considered as the animal being ‘permanently removed’ from the establishment. An animal in foster care must not be sold or rehoused from the foster care premises – the animal must be returned to the establishment for the rehoming process.

Foster care can be used for young animal rehabilitation, but has a time limit of 3 months;

(2.8.1) Juvenile foster care: The purpose of juvenile foster care is to allow a healthy kitten or puppy to be cared for off site in preparation for sale: to ensure the kitten or puppy is the health, age and weight required for vaccination and desexing prior to being sold by the establishment.

Kittens and puppies must be returned to the establishment when it is deemed appropriate by the veterinary practitioner to desex the animal post vaccination. The time an animal is in juvenile foster care must not exceed three months.

Foster care for those diseases which can cause shelter outbreaks (ringworm, FIV) is forbidden and again the time limit for foster care is three months:

(2.8.2) Veterinary rehabilitation foster care: The purpose of veterinary rehabilitation foster care is to provide an opportunity for animals with a recoverable injury or non-infectious illness to be rehomed by the establishment. Animals that have infectious diseases must not be placed in veterinary rehabilitation foster care.
…..
Animals placed in veterinary rehabilitation foster care must be returned to establishment for the purposes of desexing and rehoming. The maximum period allowed for an animal to be in medical rehabilitation foster care is three months.

Foster care for behavioural rehabilitation is extremely restricted, given a ‘failed’ temperament test is actually grounds for refusal for the program and again the time restriction for a pet to be in care is three months;

(2.8.3) Behavioural rehabilitation foster care: The purpose of behavioural rehabilitation foster care is to provide an opportunity for animals be retrained to rectify a behavioural trait restricting the animal being rehomed by the establishment. Animals that have medical issues or infectious diseases must not be placed in behavioural rehabilitation foster care. Animals that fail temperament tests must only be placed in behavioural rehabilitation foster care under recommendation from an animal behavioural specialist.

But even these restrictions aren’t the worst of the new Code of Practice; new requirements for carers go well beyond what would be acceptable to most volunteers lending a hand to their local pound or shelter – namely, that by becoming a volunteer foster carer, you’re opening your home to ‘big brother’ as determined by the DPI.

Foster carers conducting juvenile foster care for an establishment must:
……
* permit their premises to be audited for compliance with the Act and Code by an authorised officer.

Who is an ‘authorised officer’?

Authorised officers as authorised by the Minister, including authorised officers who are not employees of the Department. Then there is authorised Council officers, which also includes persons who are not Council employees.

So become a foster carer for a pound or shelter and you have to be willing to open your home to a host of people with the authorisation to audit your home. This is over and above the normal and adequate rights for Council or animal welfare to visit the home of any animal owner if you are suspected of animal abuse; instead this allows them access to check on smaller transgressions; keeping undesexed animals in areas with mandatory desexing, extra animals in places with pet limit laws, cat confinement capacity in places with night time curfews and registration and identification.

Even dedicated animal lovers are going to baulk at giving council free reign to enter and audit their pet keeping. Remembering that these aren’t people who have been accused of abuse, convicted of any transgression or even had a noise or other neighbourhood complaint…. these are people who just want to volunteer open their homes to a homeless pet for a short time to save its life.

Instead of celebrating these people, this legislation looks to drive them away with heavy handed bureaucracy and unnecessary restriction. The Code supports the pet staying in the shelter and protects the shelter should they decide to kill it.

Euthanasia

Extra provisions for shooting pets have been built in, expanding a pound’s protection should their community look to challenge their use of firearms;

(2.6) Euthanasia or removal of an animal from the establishment: If a proprietor decides that a gunshot is the only practical method of euthanasia, shooting must only be performed by an experienced operator trained in the use of firearms and only in locations where firearm use is permitted. Staff, public and nearby animal safety must be considered. This procedure must be performed away from the public and other animals.

At the very least the other two ‘animal welfare’ representatives on the AWAC board should be outraged at this; the RSPCA and The Lost Dogs Home should both be looking to eliminate the use of guns in the process of domestic animal control, no matter how regional the location.

Ok, what can I do?

The Animal Welfare Advisory Committee & Domestic Animal Management Implementation Committee (DAMIC) are the two committees who have major influence on whether this legislation gets passed quietly, or is resoundingly rejected again. It is especially important that the companion animal welfare groups involved publicly speak out against the flaws in this Code, so contacting each of them individually for their positions becomes vital.

Their contact details (via their websites) are available at the following link; DPI Committees

Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AWAC)
Mrs Carmel Morfuni Chairman, c/o Bureau of Animal Welfare, DPI
Carol de Fraga Animals Australia
Vacant Animals used in scientific procedures
Prof Paul Hemsworth Animal Welfare Science Centre
Dr David Rendell Australian Veterinary Association
Dr Carole Webb Cat Protection Society of Victoria
Ms Sara Reid Dogs Victoria
Vacant Department of Sustainability and Environment
Vacant Municipal Association of Victoria
Dr Hugh Wirth Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Dr Caroline Butler The Lost Dogs’ Home
Mr Chris Wallace-Smith Victorian Farmers Federation – extensive industries
Ms Claire Penniceard Victorian Farmers Federation – intensive industries
Ms Nicola Fanning Victorian Horse Council

Domestic Animal Management Implementation Committee (DAMIC)
Ms Rosemary Barker Chairperson Department of Justice
Ms Tracy Helman Bureau of Animal Welfare Bureau of Animal Welfare
Ms Liz Alexander Department of Planning and Community Development Department of Planning and Community Development
Mr Stewart Martin Municipal Association of Victoria (Peri-urban) Municipal Association of Victoria
Ms Elke Tapley Municipal Association of Victoria (Metropolitan) Municipal Association of Victoria
Mr Graeme Murphy Municipal Association of Victoria (Rural) Municipal Association of Victoria
Mr Peter Shelton Victorian Local Governance Association (Council) Victorian Local Governance Association
Ms Gen Hindman Local Government Professionals Organisation Local Government Professionals Organisation
Mr Kevin Apostolides Animal Welfare The Lost Dogs Home
Dr Carole Webb Animal Welfare Cat Protection Society
Mr Frank Valastro Applicable Canine Organisation Dogs Victoria
Mr Mark Eade Municipal Association of Victoria (Rural) Municipal Association of Victoria
Dr Truda Straede Applicable Cat Organisation Feline Control Council Victoria Inc.
Vern Ryan Pet Industry Association Australia (PIAA) Pet Industry Association Australia
Mr Tom Maloney Victorian Local Governance Assocation (VLGA) Community Victorian Local Governance Association

If you are a community rescue group that will have to work under this new Code, I highly recommend making a formal submission from your group.

Written submissions on the proposed Code should be sent:

By post to the Code Review Project Officer, Bureau of Animal Welfare, 475 Mickleham Road, Attwood, Victoria, 3049; or

By email addressed to [email protected]

The call for submissions has been advertised in the Government Gazette and Herald Sun and submissions will only be accepted until end of business 29 April 2011. Department employees will not accept verbal submissions from stakeholders or members of the public, response to telephone enquiries will be limited to providing information on the process for making submissions on the proposed Code.

Finally, you can also can also join the Dog Rescue Association of Victoria Inc. on Facebook to be kept up to date on developments on the Code.

I urge everyone with an interest in animal welfare, even those outside of the state of Victoria, take the time to familiaries themselves with the plight of animals in this state. Unfortunately these bad initiatives have a tendency to spread if left unchecked, and Victoria’s fight may very well become your own in the near future.