Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Appalling comments by the ISPCA

Options
1246

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    ppink wrote: »
    Is there a law to prosecute them under?

    Yes. Not only is it illegal to cause unnecessary suffering but also to procure or cause cruelty by failing to care for the animal.

    The ISPCA claim that there is no effective law but the same law applied in the UK & it didn't stop the RSPCA from prosecuting.

    The last time that I looked at the figures a person would be 6 times less likely to be prosecuted in Ireland, for animal cruelty, than in the UK & that is after you adjust for the difference in population. The ISPCA not only kill way too many dogs but they don't do their job of preventing cruelty either.


  • Options
    #93
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    The Sunday Times have another article today. Well done to journalist John Mooney.

    "Stephen Philpott CEO of the Ulster SPCA described the ISPCA's involvement in Dog Pounds as immoral .......an animal welfare group cannot kill animals in order to generate income".


  • Options
    #94
    IreneCleary
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9 ✭IreneCleary


    Very disapointed with the ISPCA comments on Facebook about John Mooney's second article, they are now giving out about other animal rescues which is a cheek. Noel Griffin started this whole thing by his disgraceful interview with John Mooney, who then contacted other animal rescues for their comments on Noel Griffen's statement about exporting dogs to the UK as any good journalists would follow do. The whole point of the first article is to highlight that pounds not run by the ISPCA have a better rehoming rate, the second article now highlights that the charity benefits from the ISPCA getting the contracts as the charity gets part of the money for their management of the pound. Animal charities should not be asking the public for money to save lives of animals and then on the other hand be running pounds with bad destruction rates. If all pounds had the same pts % then there would never have been an article in the first place, I understand that not every dog can be saved but Noel Griffen and the ISPCA should be finding ways to improve their pts rates not slagging off dogs and other rescues. shame on them, they don't seem to be learning from this experience at all. It is a shame for the animal rescues that are affliated with them as well with management like that.


  • Options
    #95
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Thanks - I was trying to get my scanner to work !. It is so annoying that the ST is now a paysite.

    Good interview on the subject by Pete the Vet here:

    http://petethevet.blogspot.com/2011/04/radio-interview-ispca-comments-about.html


  • Options
    #96
    GinaH
    Registered Users Posts: 160 ✭✭GinaH


    Discodog wrote: »
    How can the official Pound figures, that are submitted by the Pounds, lie ?. A Pound is not going to over exaggerate the number of dogs that it kills. If there is any untruth it would more likely be that Pounds understate the numbers.

    The figures are never accurate, in fact two years in a row the Cork pound's figures were identical.

    http://www.anvilireland.ie/fulcrum.html?ep=36


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    ToniTuddle
    Registered Users Posts: 8,964 ✭✭✭ToniTuddle


    byte wrote: »
    Being a Donegal man, I find the current statistics for PTS numbers quite alarming.


    Being a fellow Donegal person I'm flippin ashamed that we stand at 85% :eek:


  • Options
    #98
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    GinaH wrote: »
    The figures are never accurate, in fact two years in a row the Cork pound's figures were identical.

    http://www.anvilireland.ie/fulcrum.html?ep=36

    But there is no reason to assume that the figures for ISPCA Pounds are less accurate than any other Pound.

    The kill rate at ISPCA Pounds is not news. It's the comments of Mr Griffin that are causing the fuss & bringing the ISPCA into disrepute. Why didn't he just say that they have only recently taken over Donegal & need time to make improvements ?.

    I guess that it will be up to the Board to decide if his comments reflect the view of the ISPCA.


  • Options
    #99
    Shenshen
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,453 Mod ✭✭✭✭Shenshen


    ISDW wrote: »
    Why is it so difficult to rehome 85% of the dogs in the Donegal pound, but Leitrim pound manage to rehome all but 2%?

    You are absolutely right that the public's attitude has to change, but this is the CEO of the organisation that is supposed to look after the welfare of animals in this country, of course his attitude should change.

    And what is his attitude, do you think? Cause I can't read anything about his attitude from the article, he's only talking about attitudes he encountered in people looking to adopt a dog.


  • Options
    #100
    Shenshen
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,453 Mod ✭✭✭✭Shenshen


    ISDW wrote: »
    I know the answer, I was directing my comments at Shenshen, who seems to think that it is okay for the ISPCA to kill 85% of dogs that end up in a particular pound, rather than rehome them, when other pounds around the country that aren't run by them don't have the same difficulty. My point is that Donegal pound is run by the ISPCA, Leitrim is run by an organisation that have an onsite sanctuary and that work extremely well with other rescues. They put a lot of time and effort into working with other organisations to save dogs.

    Surely the ISPCA should have the best support infrastructures in the country, as the national animal welfare organisation? So many people work voluntarily in pounds around the country to save dogs, taking photos of the dogs, getting their details onto the internet, transporting dogs from the pounds to foster homes or onto rescue groups, fostering the dogs etc etc. Thats why the infrastructure is there, because people have bothered to put it in place, all volunteers, not paid unlike this man. I know a few animal welfare groups in Donegal, I don't know the politics of it, but I can only guess that the reason they can't get more dogs out of the pound to safety is because of the pound management.

    I love that strawman. Ignore that I've said several times already that I don't defend them putting down dogs.
    But I also don't see why him asking how others rehome dogs they themselves can't rehome is such an offensive thing to say?


  • Options
    #101
    ISDW
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,378 ✭✭✭ISDW


    Shenshen wrote: »
    I love that strawman. Ignore that I've said several times already that I don't defend them putting down dogs.
    But I also don't see why him asking how others rehome dogs they themselves can't rehome is such an offensive thing to say?

    If he was asking that question and they were doing everything they possibly could to rehome the dogs, then fair enough. But its not a case that they can't rehome them, rather that they don't bother trying to rehome them. Other pounds do, by working with other people. A few people have posted on here, that the ISPCA won't allow other rescues to take dogs out of their pounds. Obviously it is extremely difficult for a pound to rehome the vast majority of the dogs themselves, which is why people need to work together. Their refusal to do so means that dogs die needlessly.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    ISDW
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,378 ✭✭✭ISDW


    Shenshen wrote: »
    And what is his attitude, do you think? Cause I can't read anything about his attitude from the article, he's only talking about attitudes he encountered in people looking to adopt a dog.
    Discodog wrote: »
    From today's Sunday Times:

    "Noel Griffin, the ISPCA's chief executive said that his group's put to sleep figures were higher than other pounds because it does not give dogs to other welfare groups to rehome in Britain. He questioned how other Irish animal-welfare groups were managing to find homes for dogs that he said were of "no value" & "not the prettiest".

    "The exporting of dogs to the UK improves the statistics but I would question where these dogs are going" said Griffin.

    Griffin questioned why rescue groups in Britain, who accept Irish strays were taking "a load of old mongrels". "With all due respect to the little dogs they are not the prettiest so what is the attraction ?. Why would someone take five or six dogs to England ?. These are not thoroughbreds that have a value. When a dog has no value I think animal welfare goes out the window".

    Griffin said that the ISPCA did not give unwanted dogs to charities like the Dog's Trust".

    I think that attitude stinks from the CEO of the organisation that is supposed to look after animal welfare in this country. You don't think that all dogs have a value? Fair enough, but the CEO of the ISPCA should think so - in my opinion. As has been pointed out before, I also think he should know that thoroughbreds are horses, and dogs are pedigrees.

    None of the dogs that go to rescues in the UK have 'value' as they will all be neutered/spayed, so they cannot be used for breeding, so surely they are all the same?


  • Options
    #103
    EGAR
    Registered Users Posts: 2,874 ✭✭✭EGAR


    Discodog wrote: »
    "Stephen Philpott CEO of the Ulster SPCA described the ISPCA's involvement in Dog Pounds as immoral .......an animal welfare group cannot kill animals in order to generate income".

    This is ludicrous! Mr. Philpott sends undercover peeps to other rescues in NI to see if they have dogs of type! He participated in several UTV programs about *devil dogs* and seems to have no problem hunting them down and destroying them. Pot - Kettle = BLACK.


  • Options
    #104
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Shenshen wrote: »
    And what is his attitude, do you think? Cause I can't read anything about his attitude from the article, he's only talking about attitudes he encountered in people looking to adopt a dog.

    Based on his comments I doubt if he has ever met anyone looking to adopt a dog
    Shenshen wrote: »
    But I also don't see why him asking how others rehome dogs they themselves can't rehome is such an offensive thing to say?

    Why should he have to ask ?. He is the CEO of the ISPCA. He should be an expert in rehoming dogs. The fact that he has asked & made groundless allegations it is clear that he simply doesn't have a clue. Surely as a new CEO one would want to visit the rescues that rehome well & learn from them. Instead he chooses to insult them.


  • Options
    #105
    EGAR
    Registered Users Posts: 2,874 ✭✭✭EGAR


    Definition of CEO:
    The highest ranking executive in a company whose main responsibilities include developing and implementing high-level strategies, making major corporate decisions, managing the overall operations and resources of a company, and acting as the main point of communication between the board of directors and the corporate operations. The CEO will often have a position on the board, and in some cases is even the chair.

    Board of Directors ISCPA:

    ISPCA Board of Directors
    Barbara Bent (Chairperson)
    Caoimhe Howley
    Dorothy Oakley
    Marie O'Byrne
    Noel O'Donoghue
    Florence O'Sullivan
    Dorothy Walker

    Not much noise from them, is there :D?


  • Options
    #106
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    In the second ST article Barbara Bent has backed up Griffin's remarks. Also she doesn't see the ISPCA's involvement in dog control as a conflict of interest. This is hardly surprising as the policy was instigated years ago.

    Bent also said that to take a dog from their Pounds "a license is needed & confirmation of the final destination of where the dogs go". A rescue can't know who they will rehome to when they take a dog from the Pound. Maybe the variance in local ISPCA policy is because of ambiguity over how they interpret this rule.

    The only argument for the ISPCA getting involved in running Pounds is if they can save more dogs than the Local Authority. The ISPCA have been a total failure in this respect.


  • Options
    #107
    pH
    Registered Users Posts: 4,188 ✭✭✭pH


    Discodog wrote: »
    Bent also said that to take a dog from their Pounds "a license is needed & confirmation of the final destination of where the dogs go". A rescue can't know who they will rehome to when they take a dog from the Pound. Maybe the variance in local ISPCA policy is because of ambiguity over how they interpret this rule.

    Does anyone have an idea of the regulation/law that is based on. I'm pretty sure rescues are getting dogs from pounds without purchasing licenses.


  • Options
    #108
    Toulouse
    Registered Users Posts: 2,413 ✭✭✭Toulouse


    pH wrote: »
    Does anyone have an idea of the regulation/law that is based on. I'm pretty sure rescues are getting dogs from pounds without purchasing licenses.

    I think in the case of rescues she means general licenses which any rescue I know of would have.


  • Options
    #109
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    The Control of Dogs Act requires everyone to have a license so you are supposed to have a license before you take a dog from the Pound. It's a bit silly as a license is supposed to be specific to the dog so, in theory, you would need to choose a dog & then get a license before going back to collect it. But as other posters have stated a rescue may well have a general license that covers all dogs in it's care.


  • Options
    #110
    ISDW
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,378 ✭✭✭ISDW


    Discodog wrote: »
    The Control of Dogs Act requires everyone to have a license so you are supposed to have a license before you take a dog from the Pound. It's a bit silly as a license is supposed to be specific to the dog so, in theory, you would need to choose a dog & then get a license before going back to collect it. But as other posters have stated a rescue may well have a general license that covers all dogs in it's care.

    As the pounds are run for councils, most (if not all?) of them are able to issue a licence when you take a dog from it.


  • Options
    #111
    EGAR
    Registered Users Posts: 2,874 ✭✭✭EGAR


    Every single dog I take from the Pound is signed out to EGAR and obviously I can account for every dog I take in as I rehome them in Ireland.

    However, once a dog is passed on to another rescue it is up to the other rescue to provide info where the dog has ended up, no?

    I quite often take dogs from other rescues in the UK, most of them are not interested where the dog ends up here in Ireland once he/she has been released into my care. Very few follow up on the dog.

    I don't know how it works the other way around. I do know that the dogs sent from rescues (not DT Ireland itself) to DT UK usually are divided between different DT shelters across the UK and don't all go to the same DT centre in the UK.

    And as I posted before some Irish rescues send to Italy and the Tchech Republic, Germany, Switzerland etc. Often to small rescues with no shelter but foster families.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    ISDW wrote: »
    As the pounds are run for councils, most (if not all?) of them are able to issue a licence when you take a dog from it.

    Good argument for putting the word Mongrel on your license or leaving the breed blank, so it can cover any breed :D


  • Options
    #113
    ISDW
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,378 ✭✭✭ISDW


    Discodog wrote: »
    Good argument for putting the word Mongrel on your license or leaving the breed blank, so it can cover any breed :D

    Well if taking a dog from the pound, its always been my experience that they fill the licence out for that dog, so the description is up to them. But, when I took Max out of Dundalk pound, I didn't get a reminder for him the next year, because it was Louth Council who issued the licence, and I live in Sligo, so it is a very fragmented system.


  • Options
    #114
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    So what would happen if you turned up with a license for an existing dog & said that it had died ?.


  • Options
    #115
    ISDW
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,378 ✭✭✭ISDW


    Discodog wrote: »
    So what would happen if you turned up with a license for an existing dog & said that it had died ?.

    I imagine they'd offer their condolences and then charge you for a new licence for the dog you're taking out of the pound. Although I may be wrong - they may not offer their condolences:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #116
    salsagal
    Registered Users Posts: 90 ✭✭salsagal


    While I don't condone the ignorance shown by the CEO, nor his ambiguous comments, I have to say that on my first reading of the quote pasted in this thread, it seemed that he was hinting that dogs with little adoption "appeal" might end up being sold on to the huge animal testing companies that exist.

    As a vegan, I've discovered that a common practice is for pounds and rehoming services to sell on animals to be used in horrifically cruel and often wastefully unnecessary testing.

    I don't know if this practice is common in Ireland or the UK though.

    Just my 5cents worth.


  • Options
    #117
    CuireadhCrainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2 ✭CuireadhCrainn


    salsagal wrote: »
    ...I have to say that on my first reading of the quote pasted in this thread, it seemed that he was hinting that dogs with little adoption "appeal" might end up being sold on to the huge animal testing companies that exist.
    ...

    Just my 5cents worth.

    Having read this debate and the associated articles, I'm inclined to agree. He seems to be hinting at something he obviously cannot state specifically without proof.

    I hate the thought of animals being pts - and the statistics make it look like some of the smaller organisations have a lot more success re-homing.

    However, I wonder what would happen if the ISPCA disappeared in the morning. I'll bet all those other organisations would either be overwhelmed or their pts rates would go up!


  • Options
    #118
    boomerang
    Registered Users Posts: 3,189 ✭✭✭boomerang


    Other rescues have a "no kill" policy. To the best of my knowledge, the ISPCA (in their role as pound operators) are the only Irish animal welfare organisation that euthanise healthy animals.


  • Options
    #119
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    salsagal wrote: »
    I don't know if this practice is common in Ireland or the UK though.

    Just my 5cents worth.

    Totally unheard of as far as I know.


  • Options
    #120
    ISDW
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,378 ✭✭✭ISDW


    CuireadhCrainn wrote: »
    Having read this debate and the associated articles, I'm inclined to agree. He seems to be hinting at something he obviously cannot state specifically without proof.

    I hate the thought of animals being pts - and the statistics make it look like some of the smaller organisations have a lot more success re-homing.

    However, I wonder what would happen if the ISPCA disappeared in the morning. I'll bet all those other organisations would either be overwhelmed or their pts rates would go up!

    I don't have any issues with the ISPCA as a welfare organisation, but I do have issues with them running council pounds, getting paid for it and then killing dogs without trying too hard to find them homes. If the ISPCA disappeared in the morning, then other organisations would take over the running of the pounds and who knows, maybe they could do a better job of it, like the people who run other pounds around the country, such as Leitrim.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,862 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    ISDW wrote: »
    I don't have any issues with the ISPCA as a welfare organisation, but I do have issues with them running council pounds, getting paid for it and then killing dogs without trying too hard to find them homes.

    But doesn't this question their real desire to improve animal welfare ?.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement