Cat killed, Chronicle cries

pinklink said :

No matter what people think of RSPCA, getting an animal from a pet shop is simply wrong….. Justin I would like to hear about your episode in the car park so I can correct it and work with the staff member.Michael

Thanks for the response Michael. I agree that the practices of some pet shops are not ethical, which is why, in our case, we were at the RSPCA in the first place.

Excuse the off topic conversation, but you asked for further details of my story above: we were in a line of customers, as my daughter had been saving for a cat. While in the line, the lady in front heard us and mentioned that her cat had recently had a litter and asked if we would like one of its kittens. We agreed to look at them, and waited in the carpark for her to finish. We were exchanging phone numbers when the staffer approached us. She said that she had overheard us and that the RSPCA was not a ‘clearing house’ for unwanted pets etc, in a manner aggressive enough to upset my daughter. We had not spoken to her or any other RSPCA staffer inside.

I understand that to work for the RSPCA one has to be passionate about animals, but I think in this instance she had let her passion get the better of her. No matter her views on what she had overheard, I think that it was wrong to approach us in the carpark.

Good on you for chiming in on this matter, Michael. It’s good to see that RSPCA ACT is prepared to engage with the community on issues like this. BTW, I think you guys do a great job and wish all RSPCA branches had your no-kill policies and high homing rate.

Hi, Michael Linke, CEO of RSPCA ACT here.

Firstly Justin “When our moggy turns up his toes, our next pet will come from a pet shop, not the RSPCA.” Perhaps you should read page 2 of the Chronicle today. No matter what people think of RSPCA, getting an animal from a pet shop is simply wrong.

Now to behaviour testing. Sadly the TV show does not do it justice nor has an RSPCA ACT behaviour test ever featured on the show. In 2009 RSPCA ACT managed 1660 dogs, only 54 failed a behaviour assessment, that’s 3%. We homed 93% of dogs in 2009, the other 4% put to sleep were for medical reasons.

RSPCA ACT is the only RSPCA that engages qualified behaviour trainers. Our system is by far the best system and ensures dogs go home. If dogs fail, they are worked on and we engage ongoing behaviour modification.

With regard to cats, we are the only shelter that does cat assessments, and again an assessment gives us an insight into a cat before we work with it to adjust its behaviour. The case in the Chronicle is light on facts and much of what I gave the reporter was not covered. The cat was very aggressive, was given time to settle here and was worked on and observed by a number of skilled staff.

62 cats of the 2489 we handled in 2009 failed a temperament test. 104 of the 2489 cats we managed could not be handled at all by our staff.

In many cases animals undergo multiple tests, no animal is ever put to sleep on the results of one test, unless the results are so severe that we can not see any way for the animal to improve. In some cases a cat will not be tested as it is too aggressive as it poses OH&S risks for staff.

Feral cats are categorised separately.

We are proud of our work and encourage feedback. Justin I would like to hear about your episode in the car park so I can correct it and work with the staff member.

Michael

justin heywood said :

When our moggy turns up his toes, our next pet will come from a pet shop, not the RSPCA.

And therefore supporting the puppy/kitten farms that most pet shops get their stock from.

If Einstein wanted the cat why did Einstein take it to the RSPCA?

To find if it had an owner, ‘Einstein’. No wonder your user name is only two letters long. You’d forget it otherwise.

jthommo said :

Native birds are a little safer after that miscommunication. There should be more of it.

And if we killed you, then lots of cows, chickens, fish and other animals would be a lot safer … also, the world would be slightly more intelligent.

Danman said :

RSPCA (with whom I have zero affiliation) do a great job day in and day out, the sad thing is that people only notice how good a job they are doing when they have an occasional slip up.

I agree Danman that the RSPCA play a vital role in animal welfare and I’m sure the staff do their best in a tough job. BUT, I have had two bad experiences with the RSPCA. Granted, they probably have cause to be careful, given some of the situations they encounter, but I have found them high-handed and officious. Not everyone mistreats their animals. We certainly don’t.

At one stage we were being harangued in the RSPCA carpark by a staffer, while my daughter was almost in tears. The staffer knew nothing about us or the animal involved, but had simply overheard a conversation while we were waiting to be served. She had then taken it upon herself to follow us out to the car and give us the benefit of her views.

When our moggy turns up his toes, our next pet will come from a pet shop, not the RSPCA.

There are a lot of lovely animals looking for new homes. Ones that do pass behavioural assessments. This is a real shame for that lady but the RSPCA does all they can, so lets lay off this critical service to the community.
If you are looking to adopt a cat (or other pet) see http://www.petrescue.com.au/ The RSPCA lists their adoptable animals there as well as several other rescue agencies around Australia.

So a handfull (if that) of bad stories about the RSPCA and you are now not interested in saving the life of an animal that may potentially be marked for death?..

Regardless of who is the bad party here, if I had it in my power to save any animal from death I would, now you say that as a result of stories like the one posted, you have been put off of adopting one from the RSPCA ?

I dunno about you, but no matter how evil (if evil at all) the RSPCA is, I woul dstill save an animal from an uncertain future.

RSPCA (with whom I have zero affiliation) do a great job day in and day out, the sad thing is that people only notice how good a job they are doing when they have an occasional slip up.

Regardless, slip up or not, there are plenty of lives at stake – by ruling out adopting from teh RSPCA – you have now just increased the odds of a bad outcome.

If you were serious about adopting a pet to save its life, I woul dhave thought that the story presented by the OP would have youy racing over there, however, you choose the oppisite. (Insert Leonard Nemoy voice) – I find this highly illogical.

A couple of years ago, close friends moved into an apartment with a courtyard that backed onto a reserve with houses on the other side of the reserve. Their cat, who had previously lived in a huge yard, was a little bit of an explorer and visited these houses. One of the neighbours in these houses took offence with this and called Animal Services/RSPCA everytime this cat entered their yard, despite the fact that the cat was clearly tagged with our friends contact details. On one of the numerous visits that our friends had to the RSPCA to collect their cat, the RSPCA explained that if the cat came back one more time they would gas, as it had exhibited anti-social behaviour. Our friends ended up resorting to putting their cat on a leash in their courtyard – end result, extremely unhappy cat.

A bit of common sense would not have gone astray here: neighbours should have called the owner of the cat, rather than wasting everyones time traipsing back forth between the RSPCA (possibly the RSPCA could have suggested this to the neighbours as well, but that is another story); RSPCA might use common sense when handling animals (some animals like humans do not like being handled by strangers).

Have been considering getting a dog, but as a result of stories like this have been put off by adopting one from the RSPCA, which is a real shame.

If Einstein wanted the cat why did Einstein take it to the RSPCA?

Native birds are a little safer after that miscommunication. There should be more of it.

It did state in the article, amongst the whinging, that the animal did not pass the “behavioural assessment” so the cat could not be returned.

On the same topic, judging by what I’ve seen on shows like “RSPCA Animal Rescue”, the RSPCA’s “behavioural assessments” are bordering on a joke whereby if the animal shows any dislike for a person or another animal that they are declared to have failed and sent off to the animal farm in the sky. I understand that the tests are there to ensure the pets won’t go around mauling people etc, but I’m fairly sure that if they applied the same tests to the majority of pets living in peoples’ homes then there would be a massive pet graveyard. You think there would be some common sense shown in judging whether the behaviour can be managed and the extreme cases where there is a high risk.