Tasmanian pounds to kill because what more do you want?

The RSPCA Tasmania is consolidating its services as part of its plan to rebuild community support, after a decade or so of internal shenanigans. It announced yesterday that as part of this restructure it would reduce the scope of services it offered local councils;

RSPCA general manager Peter West said the group wanted to shed responsibility for animal management, pest control and dealing with stray animals.

“We’ve sort of become the place that fixes all those problems, when really those problems are of local government or State Government,” he said.

“So what we’re doing now is pushing back a bit to say you guys need to handle animal management, you guys need to handle pest control, we’ll certainly be there to help animals in need but that’s not our core function.”

Peter West really does seem to be well on the way to making a proverbial silk purse from this organisation’s crusty ear, and giving the responsibility for managing stray pets back to local councils is an excellent move. People don’t bequest their houses to the RSPCA so the organisation can play dog-catcher.

However, the Tasmanian Local Government Association (LGAT) is not happy. They don’t want to be forced to – you know – do their jobs…

LGAT Policy Director Katrena Stephenson ~ “It may if there are less places in the pool to take on the re-homing, so by the RSPCA contracting, the other organisations may not be able to pick up the difference, that possibly it may lead to more euthanasia of animals.”

“It might mean there is more of a focus on humane euthanasia,” she said.

and

“If those rehoming opportunities aren’t there, under the local government act councils may be required to destroy animals.”

If rehoming opportunities don’t exist with local rescue groups, there is in fact NO requirement in ANY act ‘requiring’ council kill an animal. Instead it is the responsibility of pounds to be working to create their own rehoming opportunities for animals, by offering a comprehensive direct-from-pound adoption program themselves. Staff should see it as a vital part of their jobs to save the lives of pets.

Simply choosing to kill pets to make animal management problems go away is not only completely out of step with community expectation, it is deeply unethical. If pound staff aren’t willing to step up and work to find homes for these animals, the community should be asking… just what are we paying you for?

Stray pets belong to the community. Councils pound services have a responsibility to ensure a pet’s safety while they wait for their owners AND to find them new homes should their owner no longer want to/cannot care for them. Killing because of deficiencies in the system is not ‘euthanasia’ – it is unacceptable and unnecessary killing.

Tasmanian’s get active. If your local council isn’t offering direct from pound rehoming ask them, why the bloody hell not?