RSPCA of SA Inc

No Duck Hunting in 2007!

The RSPCA is very pleased that the Department for Environment and Heritage announced on 28 December 2006 that the South Australian Duck Hunting Season will be closed in 2007. The Government has determined that the drought affecting much of south-eastern Australia has significantly affected wetland areas and the breeding opportunities for our waterbirds are severely limited. Victoria announced a similar ban last week.

The RSPCA has always opposed recreational hunting of ducks, and not just in drought years. This ‘sport’ cripples and wounds countless birds, with many left to suffer and die slow painful deaths. There is nothing humane about duck shooting.

While duck shooters may claim to be professional and skilled, even the best marksman cannot guarantee that the ducks will be killed outright, which leaves birds to die in agony.

South Australia should follow in the steps of WA, NSW, QLD and the ACT where recreational duck hunting has been banned. Several years ago, one of the largest petitions ever presented to Government called for a permant ban on duck shooting in SA.
 

2 comments December 28th, 2006

Thankyou to the RSPCA

The following letter was recently received by the RSPCA and has been published with the consent of the author.

“19 December 2006

Dear RSPCA Team

I am writing this letter in appreciation of the wonderful work you do and in particular would like an RSPCA Inspector thanked for the prompt, caring and professional way in which he handled an incident over the weekend.

I contacted the RSPCA on Saturday morning after having seen a cat with a terrible facial condition and in poor general health as I was driving home from work. I had actually planned to catch the cat as it was wandering the pavement next to a busy main road, and take it to my local vet and pay for it to be put down to prevent any further suffering and after not being able to raise the owners.

The vet actually advised to contact the RSPCA which I did. I contacted the office and within 15 minutes had a call from one of your Inspectors. He was an absolute gem from the word go, very professional, and he talked me through the various options. Fortunately his workload enabled him to attend the property within an hour. He spoke to the owner and a cat cage was left as the owner was co-operative and willing to capture and relinquish the cat if treatment or euthanasia were required (they were unable to find the cat at that particular time).

The Inspector called me back, advised of his actions and his intention to return to the property. He returned the following day and collected th cat which was suffering from extensive cancer and was euthanised. He was very caring and his word was kept - he followed up and also had the decency to keep me informed of the action that was to be taken. To be honest - I was not expecting this, which is one of the reasons I thought I would just deal with the sitation myself to prevent this poor cat from suffering. The thought of not knowing the outcome would have added further sleepless nights. In addition, I was not sure how long it would be before the incident could be investigated and I wanted the cat to suffer for the least time possible.

All my fears were completely allayed and I was so grateful and impressed with the efficiency, professionalism and sensitivity with which the RSPCA handled this. I had actually thought to myself;”it’s a cat, it’s the weekend - I’m sure they won’t see this as a priority with the numerous other investigations they must have“. I am thrilled to have been wrong.

Both our cat and dog were rescued as strays and are loved to death and while we are saddened that not all animals enjoy a life like ours, we are truly grateful that the RSPCA exists, and does indeed care for all creatures, great and small.

Please find enclosed our membership application which we will renew each year, and an additional donation which we hope will help to cover the costs that the RSPCA would have incurred in helping that poor suffering cat.

Could you please ensure a copy of this letter is passed onto Senior Management, staff and to the Inspector himself so that staff can see there are people like us who are truly grateful for the work you do.

With respect and thanks

John and Sandy N.”

Note: It is likely that this cat was suffering from a relatively common disease called “Feline Squamous Cell Carcinoma” or “facial cancer”. It tends to be seen in non-pigmented tissues around the ears and nose, particulalrly in white cats. If detected early, the tumours can be removed surgically. If untreated, the cancer can internalise and cause massive tumour growth inside the nose and mouth, which can lead to infection and death. White cats and cats with unpigmented skin should be kept out of direct sunlight whenever possible and they should be frequently checked for lesions on their ears and nose.

Technorati : feline squamous cell carcinoma

2 comments December 26th, 2006

Man Prosecuted for Castrating Pet Dog with Sheep Ring

The RSPCA has prosecuted a man from Colonel Light Gardens (in suburban Adelaide) after he attempted to desex his one-year old Maltese Terrier dog by placing a rubber ring around the dog’s testicles.

When the RSPCA inspected the animal, its testicles were very swollen and inflamed, and the little dog was in great pain. He was taken straight to a vet, who surgically castrated the dog and gave pain relief for the wound. Without this veterinary treatment, he could have died from serious infection.

The dog’s owner had placed a thick rubber band (called an elastrator band) on the dog, the same type used to castrate new-born lambs and calves. But dogs’ (and cats’) testicles have a much different structure to the testicles of lambs and calves and it is inevitable that the process will be painful and risky for dogs and cats.

The dog’s owner loved his pet and was unaware that elastrator bands are not appropriate for dogs and cats. He was remorseful for the pain he caused and his dog was returned on the understanding that he would care for it appropriately in future.

The Court Magistrate convicted the man and fined him $1,000 with costs of $631, including $341 for the dog’s veterinary treatment.

Dogs and cats should only be desexed by a veterinary surgeon, who will carry out the procedure under general anaesthetic and give pain relief and antibiotics where appropriate.

Technorati : animal, castration, fine, maltese terrier

Add comment December 21st, 2006

Protect your Cat from Feline AIDS (FIV)

Many people do not realize that in Adelaide, the disease Feline AIDS (Feline Immunodeficiency Virus FIV) is now more prevalent in cats than the other common viral diseases such as cat ‘flu, feline enteritis and feline leukaemia. Between 7% and 29% of cats are found to be infected with Feline Aids, with most infections occurring in cats which are unowned, undesexed and which are permitted to roam freely.

Feline AIDS is fatal to cats, and there is no known treatment.

Cats catch this disease from already infected cats, usually from bites or close physical contact.

Unlike for human AIDS (HIV), there is now a safe and effective vaccine available and all cats which have access to the outdoors (and so vulnerable to contact with infected cats) should be vaccinated against Feline AIDS.

Cats which are allowed to roam free are also at risk of developing serious abscesses from cat fights and from traffic accidents. Pet cats should therefore be brought in at night and confined to suitable outdoor or indoor enclosures at other times.

6 comments December 14th, 2006

Protected Pets project

• “Father shoots family dog in front of young son to “help him grow up””
• “Husband threatens to torture pets if wife leaves”

These types of allegation are all too frequent when people use animals as a means of threatening and punishing members of their own families. People and their animals are frequent victims of domestic violence.

The Women’s Information Service conducted a phone-in in August 2005. Of the women surveyed,

• 78% of respondents said that their partner had threatened to harm their pets,
• 61% of respondents stated that fear for their pets had prevented them from leaving earlier and
• 74% of respondents indicated that they would require assistance to find temporary accommodation for their pet should they go to a shelter or other safe place.

The Protected Pets Project started after Officers at the Women’s Information Service told us about calls they received about domestic violence, and the problems associated with the lack of available resources to assist with accommodation for victims, their children and also their pets. Workers at the Domestic Violence Helpline and some vets have also noticed that this was a worrying issue.

There are inadequate facilities in South Australia to address this problem. The RSPCA can provide temporary boarding for 1 week, and women can use private kennels or catteries, however, these can be very expensive and are virtually unavailable during holiday seasons.

Over the past couple of years programs have been established in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Tasmania. A working group has been established to address the problem, consisting of representatives from RSPCA, Australian Veterinary Association, Domestic Violence Helpline, Women’s Information Service and Domestic Violence Crisis Service. This working group has applied for federal funding to build kennels and catteries specifically for the Protected Pets Project animals, similar to programs currently in place in NSW, QLD, Victoria and Tasmania.

As the project develops and expands, more women will be able to access the service leading to more women, children and their pets being able to live in safe environments. As well as the direct benefit to clients there will also be an increase in awareness about the proven correlation between animal abuse, domestic violence and child abuse. Training will be conducted by domestic violence services for participating vets around the issues of domestic violence and the resources that are available.

Stay tuned into our blog and we will let you know more as soon as we can.

Add comment December 11th, 2006

Give the gift of care

Looking for the perfect gift for an animal lover?

Why not give them the gift of care — the RSPCA Donation Gift Card.

By purchasing one of these special cards in your friend’s name, you and your friend will be helping the Society’s special work in caring for around 26,000 sick, injured, unwanted, neglected, lost and cruelly treated animals each year in South Australia.

As a non-government charity, the RSPCA needs the help of the community to perform this vital work.

Choose from a range of colourful donation cards, depicting a range of issues. Ring 1800 652 866 to order!

Take a look at a pdf file showing the different cards available for purchase.

Technorati : donation, rspca

Add comment December 9th, 2006

Release of the Draft Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Animal Welfare) Amendment Bill

During 2003, RSPCA (SA) undertook an internal review of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1985 (the Act). On completion of that process, the RSPCA wrote to the former Minister for Environment and Conservation, Hon John Hill, suggesting a number of proposals for improvement of the Act. Minister Hill issued a public discussion paper in 2005, largely based on the proposals raised by the RSPCA.
After consideration of the feedback received, the draft Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Animal Welfare) Bill 2006 has been developed.

Public consultation on the draft Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Animal Welfare) Amendment Bill commenced on 05 December 2006.
Proposed changes to the Act include proposals to:

• DOUBLE penalties up to $20,000 or 2 year’s imprisonment for animal illtreatment and organised animal fights, such as cock-fighting.
• EMPOWER RSPCA Inspectors to routinely inspect intensive farming establishments, puppy farms, circuses, council pounds and similar places holding animals.
• ALLOW RSPCA Inspectors to enter a property to rescue an animal, even if the owner is not present.
• EMPOWER courts to order confiscation of objects used in an offence.
• FORCE owners to forfeit mistreated animals without having to seek a conviction through a court.
• CREATE a new offence for keeping animals in conditions likely to cause pain, distress or disease.

Written comment on the content of the draft Bill or suggestions for provisions that should be incorporated into the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1985 are invited to be submitted by 29 January 2007.

The draft Bill, Explanatory Paper and Comments PRO-FORMA are available from all DEH offices or from the DEH Animal Welfare Website, which is at http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/animalwelfare/issues.html

For further information contact the DEH Animal Welfare Unit on (08) 8124 4800.

The RSPCA urges its supporters to endorse the above new provisions in the Bill, which will greatly increase the effectiveness of enforcement and therefore the protection of animals in South Australia.

Please take the time to read the Bill and submit your comments in support of these necessary changes.

Add comment December 6th, 2006

Trapped cat left to suffer

A man pleaded guilty to 3 charges of ill-treating a cat after setting 4 steel jawed rabbit traps on his property in Whyalla. Jeffrey Luxton was convicted and fined $500 and ordered to pay costs of $649 for setting 4 steel jawed traps, illtreating a cat caught in 2 of the traps, and having injured the cat, failing to alleviate its pain.

The cat’s owner became concerned when she heard her pet cat “Darkie” calling in pain from a neighbour’s garden. She saw the cat was unable to walk and was crying. With the property owner away, the local officer from the RSPCA Whyalla Shelter was called, who then arranged for the Metropolitan Fire Service to access the property because of the high fences.

“Darkie’s” front and hind legs were caught in 2 traps and a further 2 set traps were seen nearby. The RSPCA rushed the cat to a local vet who examined “Darkie” and treated her swollen, bruised and infected wounds. Thankfully, no bones were broken and “Darkie” recovered.

Luxton was subsequently interviewed by RSPCA Inspectors and admitted to setting traps to try and catch a fox he believed had killed some pet rabbits. He also admitted to having caught another cat some days earlier and said he “gave it a smack in the head” and then released it. He also admitted to seeing Darkie caught in a trap, but left it there to go to the shops. He told the Inspectors he intended to give Darkie a “smack on the head” and let her go when he returned.

The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act prohibits the setting of steel-jawed leghold traps (except for areas north of the dog fence). These traps cause serious pain and injury to animals and are also a hazard to children. There are more appropriate and humane means of deterring unwanted cats (or foxes) from household properties.

The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act prohibits the setting of steel-jawed leghold traps (except for areas north of the dog fence). These traps cause serious pain and injury to animals and are also a hazard to children. There are more appropriate and humane means of deterring unwanted cats (or foxes) from household properties.

Add comment December 4th, 2006

Animal rights and animal welfare — what’s the difference?

To the average Australian, there may appear to be little disagreement between the philosophies of animal welfare groups such as RSPCA Australia, and animal rights activists such as Animal Liberation or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).

However, there are in fact several fundamental differences between the guiding principals of these organisations.

In the past, the RSPCA has been criticised by various groups for not reacting extremely enough to incidents where the welfare of animals may have been affected. In these instances, it can be helpful to clarify the difference between the interests, goals and priorities of animal rights and animal welfare.

For example, those who criticise the RSPCA for working closely with farmers may be opposed to farming altogether, and so this belief will no doubt affect their point of view.

The ultimate goal of the animal welfare approach is to prevent suffering and cruelty to animals.

Achieving this goal may involve the operation of animal shelters, homes, clinics, hospitals or animal ambulances; enforcement of existing animal protection legislation and lobbying for changes to the law when necessary; and dissemination of information to educate the community about the proper treatment of animals.

It also means working with the people and organisations that may impact upon the welfare of animals - including pet owners, farmers, researchers, land owners, producers, veterinarians, breeders and government.

By contrast, the philosophy behind animal rights is that humans and animals are equal and that all use of animals by humans is in fact, exploitation.

Therefore, the goal of this movement is to end all human use of animals - this may include the farming of animals for consumption or for their products (meat, eggs, milk, honey), using animals for any medical or veterinary research, keeping of animals for sport or entertainment (e.g., zoos, circuses, rodeos, horseshows, dog shows, animals performing in TV commercials, shows or movies), guide-dogs for the blind, police dogs, search & rescue dogs, as well as the practice of owning pets.

For example, rights-based organisations do not usually operate animal care facilities such as shelters; whereas a large portion of the RSPCA resources go to operation of animal care facilities such as shelters and the inspectorate, which are responsible for the care of more than 140,000 animals that are received from the community each year and investigating more that 45,000 complaints of animal cruelty and neglect.

The RSPCA in Australia is an animal welfare organisation. It is not an animal rights organisation. As stated in its national Policies and Position Papers,

“RSPCA Australia believes that man must treat animals humanely. Where man makes use of animals or interferes with their habitat, he should bestow a level of care befitting man’s own dignity as a rational, intelligent, compassionate being, and a level of care merited by the nature of the animal as a sentient creature capable of responding to man’s care and attention. Such care should be marked by sympathy, consideration, compassion and tenderness towards animals.”

The RSPCA does recognise that animal welfare organisations may have many goals in common with various animal rights groups, such as seeking an end to cruel farming practices such as battery hens and live exports. Therefore you will often find both animal welfare and animal rights organisations campaigning on the same issue but utilising different methods to achieve their desired outcomes.

Technorati : animal rights, animal welfare, rspca

1 comment December 1st, 2006