Back in August 2011, the NSW Government announced the creation of the state’s first Companion Animals Taskforce. Gathering together vet and Member for Charlestown, Mr Andrew Cornwell MP and representatives from the Animal Welfare League NSW, Australian Companion Animal Council, Australian Institute of Local Government Rangers, Australian Veterinary Association, Cat Protection Society of NSW, Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW, Dogs NSW, Pet Industry Association Australia, and Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals NSW, the Taskforce was set the goal to “provide advice on key companion animal issues and in particular strategies to reduce the current rate of companion animal euthanasia”.
So one would be forgiven for thinking that 8 months later they would release a paper that would focus on ‘strategies to reduce the current rate of euthanasia’, or in laymans terms ‘stop pounds killing pets’. But you’d be wrong.
Things we know stop pounds killing pets;
– programs which keep untame cats out of shelters
– forcing pounds to release healthy, treatable animals to rescue, or rehome them themselves
Or more comprehensively, the eleven point plan of the No Kill equation (the only model that has been successful in creating community where pets were safe in pounds and shelters).
The Taskforce came up with the following plan instead;
– Anti-breeding laws
Introduce a breeder licensing system
– Anti-advertising law
Mandatory listing of an animal’s microchip number in all advertisements
– Microchipping
(they already have compulsory microchipping) host microchipping days
– Registration
Increase registration fees to pay for programs
– Desexing of owned pets
Offer desexing programs
– Education
Print brochures in another language
None of which have ever seen success in driving a community to achieve any No Kill outcomes. In layman’s terms again – these things don’t stop pounds killing pets.
They did deal briefly with the pounds role in saving lives;
“‘Encourage’ greater collaboration between councils and animal welfare organisations – Councils and AWOs could be ‘encouraged’ to enter into arrangements”
So like, they need ‘encouragement’. ENCOURAGEMENT PEOPLE! Not killing animals isn’t motivation enough – pounds need rescue groups to pander and support and ‘encourage’ them to not kill the animals, but to instead release them alive.
“While re-homing such animals with new owners is the most desirable outcome, it must be acknowledged that councils have limited resources and not all cats and dogs are suitable for re-homing.”
… However, pound managers face substantial obstacles in doing so, particularly as pounds compete with pet shops and breeders as sources of animals and often do not have the resources to advertise animals in their care widely to the public.”
But even if pounds choose NOT to work with rescue groups, killing is not their fault as they have limited resources, their animals are crap, and they don’t have resources to promote their crappy animals to the public.
(BTW, Digital camera $100 – PetRescue account FREE. Putting kittens in a pet shop FREE. Contacting the local media and inviting them to profile your pets FREE. Running an adoption event FREE).
Semi-owned cats are another factor contributing to unwanted cat populations, as the vast majority are undesexed. Targeted community education aimed at changing people’s behaviours is considered central to managing these cats. The Victorian Government’s “Who’s for cats?” and the “Good Cat South Australia” campaigns are examples of such programs.
So what they’ve chosen to do is follow in the footsteps of the Who’s for Cats program which saw impoundments surge by 40% every year it was executed, and increased complaints about cats by 41% in the first year… and continues to support record levels of killing in Victoria.
“Unconfined animals that are subsequently seized by councils or picked up by members of the public make up a significant number of those animals entering pounds… cat control orders have been used in other jurisdictions for a number of years to manage roaming cats.”
Sorted! Just catch them and bring them in to be killed – that will reduce the killing! Oh, hang on…
Whether all or none of the Taskforce’s recommendations are implemented makes little difference to outcomes for pets. And it was never meant to. It is not in the interest of those working with the government on this paper, to stop killing our companion animals, or even bring down impound rates because killing pets has become big business. Pound contract are often worth several million dollars per year and are priced according to how many pets are processed (not saved).
The illusion of ‘doing something’ however, will most certainly cost even more animals their lives as the community begin to think the problem is in hand. The full report can be seen here. They are currently seeking feedback – a good place to start in your research is the No Kill Advocacy Center’s Shelter Reform Primer.
Get writing peeps!
OMG !, More wasted time- big whoop and lets all celebrate because the task force has solved the problem of huge kill rates in this country “NOT”.
A stacked deck in a full house of self vested interest groups who have failed our animals time and time again leads us on the road to no where.
Where are the representatives of so many “coal face ” rescue groups who know what needs doing?.
Where are the high volume low cost desexing programs?,
Where is the TNR programs?
Where is the banning of internet sales?.
etc etc etc.
Enough is enough, we will be demanding that we are listened to, so bloody angry that a cat killing man, a so called animal welfare group that continues to advance its profile while hoarding its many millions, and the AVA who in general don’t have a clue about animal rescue and think they may be desexing themselves out of business.
SHAME SHAME SHAME Australia.
I read the discussion paper last night. My immediate reaction is whilst there are one or two reasonable strategies to consider and support, it is clear to me that the vested interests comprising the main members of the “Taskforce” are cementing their positions to ensure that their business or hobby interests are not compromised and that the public once again bear the brunt of extra expenses required. Indeed they will probably profit from it. You only have to check out the members of the “Taskforce” to understand that the whole exercise is deeply flawed as a vehicle of providing the Minister with unbiased and objective advice. I don;t know why pet owners should pay more via increased registrations to fund more dollars that will inevitably flow to members of ACAC (“increased research” – guess who will put their hand up to be paid to do it??””). My view is that the worthwhile strategies suggested should be funded by the pet industry and breeders, and indeed the RSPCA NSW whose coffers are flowing. They could just sell one or two of the numerous residential properties bequested to them couldn’t they?. Overall, not impressed. Why wasn’t one of the simplest remedies mentioned? : “do what it takes to encourage the public to get their pets from a shelter or pound rather than breeders or pet shops”???
The Taskforce was announced in August. The public discussion paper came out early May, and submissions must be in by end July. It will take a further month or two to get summaries and recommendations to the Ministers and more months to get any action going. So a whole year will have passed and another 50,000 + cats and dogs killed in the meantime. The total lack of sense of urgency by this Taskforce is mind-numbing….and as the blog above describes, what’s going to happen anyway?
I just can not understand why this is so hard??? If an animal comes into a shelter, pound rescue org, IT HAS TO BE DESEXED, unless a registered breeder (anyone can apply) or applied to have a undesexed dog / cat. This would reduce the amount of animals being killed. In conjunction with a mass de-sexing program for the community. Cost price and ask Gov for tax break for vet’s who participate etc. Have a look at some different “no-kill” systems in other countries that have had proven success. e.g. De-sexing Alpha Tom Cats and replacing them back into the environment. Along with the removal of unwanted cat program. Not just kill the ones there and then their kittens grow up breed and the cycle repeats. LET’S TRY TO FIX THE PROBLEM.
I thought it was going to be illegal to sell puppies & kittens in pet stores?
They can not afford to advitise….WAKE UP. Every council or RSPCA etc has a web site. Design a page to advertise animals looking for owners or a home…
Problem solved.
Making microchip details be shown is a great start…. But I do not see how this is going to help the general public who do not have access to CAR the registry?
They mention money being a problem… Why not make some $$$ back and actually help out the situation. Train a person to conduct training and information sessions from the council & RSPCA for people who have noise complaints, escaping or prevention of dog bite programs for kids?? People with “dangerous dogs” get education and assistance. Hay.. this would be the prevention part !!!
Backyard breeders… Easy if not registered fines & on the microchip register as back yard breeder & to be checked up on. ALL puppy’s or dog that are desexed get a tattoo / link to the microchip register. Rangers will not be spending their time chasing unwanted dogs, transporting them etc. After a 1-2 year period all puppies & kittens on the new register.
So rangers, vet’s, pounds… can scan any puppy / kitten to see if from a registered breeder, if negibours or people see a puppy/ kitten in the community it can be reported and rangers go to house just the same as a complaint now. There is a lot more ideas & thought from a wide variety of people happy to contribute. But LET’S ACTUALLY TRY SOMETHING.
PLEASE make it a MUST not just “encouraged” for animals who are unable to be rehomed thru shelters or pounds to be offered to the animals to a recognised Foster group or Rescue Organisation. How do you get “recognised” ? There are already specifications in place, INVITE US TO A MEETING and we can work together..
This will save you money, create good P.R. within a large part of the animal world, and making those without animals happy as not spending their money. Work in conjunction with the current responsible breeders. Hay want to make more $$$$ back to pay for it… if they register as a breeder, they can pay to advitise on the council/pound website that would be set up to rehome lost or unwanted animals previously mentioned.
Regards Nathan Barnes.
P.S. If any member of this board would like to include Rescue & Fostering members of the community please get in touch with some of them.
I agree with all of you guys and am all for many of the options in the CA Taskforce Discussion Paper. However I struggle a little when I read comments such as, “do what it takes to encourage the public to get their pets from a shelter or pound rather than breeders or pet shops”? Dogs NSW have many good breeders, doing all the right hereditary defect checks and dna testing and selling on limited non-breeding registration, under contract with desexing conditions attached. These breeders should be supported for doing the right thing. If no-one is allowed to breed healthy registered dogs, in 20 years there will be no dogs left?? I for one wouldn’t want to be without my trusty little mates.
Sorry Paul but I feel the push should be towards blocking BYB or unregistered breeders by not allowing advertising of puppy sales (online, papers, etc.) or from petshops. No advertising or selling of puppies where parents haven’t had all possible checks for their breed, including all registered purebred breeders. Plus, compulsory desexing of all adult dogs rehomed by shelters, RSPCA, etc and compulsory desexing of unregistered puppies by 6 months old.
[…] Pets comments on the Companion Animals Taskforce Discussion Paper. (And posted a great image: We’re overcomplicating […]