Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Comp desexing research

Expand Messages
  • Angela Pollard
    Hi Angela On Friday 2 October I tried to deliver the attached papers with a note from Barbara Steffensen to the NRCLC, but of course you were closed. And I
    Message 1 of 2 , Oct 5, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Angela

      On Friday 2 October I tried to deliver the attached papers with a note
      from Barbara Steffensen to the NRCLC, but of course you were closed. And
      I could not find a post box there.

      So, I am attaching copies now, with the text of Barbara's note below, so
      that you have them before the meeting on Tuesday afternoon, 6 October. I
      shall also post them to you tomorrow. ARRG sends its apologies for the
      meeting - neither Barbara nor I can be there.

      Another ARRG volunteer prepared the book extracts from Nathan Winograd's
      'Redemption' (2007) and highlighted bits. But these are not readable
      either on screen or on a printout (!), so I'll quote those bits below too
      - sorry about the bittiness of this, the result of no one person having
      total control of a task. The highlighed bits of the RSPCA financial
      statements seem to view OK.

      Barbara's note -
      "Enclosed excerpts from Nathan Winograd's book 'Redemption' - a speaker at
      the Animal Welfare League conference this week.

      He clearly states desexing laws won't work. What will work is high
      volume/low cost-free desexing programs in all areas of Australia.

      The large wealthy national animal organisations should be required to use
      a major proportion of their funds (public donations) on desexing high
      volume/low cost and not accumulate vast money in shares unused to stop the
      killing. These organisations should be accountable for using the public's
      money in the right way and the most vital way is the stop holding on to it
      and spend it."

      Highlighted sections -

      Page 28 - "... and ultimately impoundment and killing of their pets."
      "LES ( Legislation, Education and Sterilization) ... 'there is nothing we
      can do'."

      Page 29 - "... despite outcry from private veterinarians and their
      associations when the program first began, there was no discernible loss
      of business over time."
      "... because the clinics were being used by poor people who would not
      otherwise have had their pets altered."
      "In 1976, the large national groups met for a second time ... ignoring the
      success of publicly funded ..."

      Page 192 - "No Kill is achieved only by guaranteeing the following ..."
      "Public shelters work with humane animal adoption organizations ..."
      " ... must be the immediate goal of every shelter ..."

      Page 193 - "Immediate implementation of the following programs ..."
      "High-volume, low- and no-cost spay neuter services."
      "A foster care network for underaged ..."
      "Trap-Neuter-Return or Release (TNR) programs"
      "... is killed that all efforts to save the animal ..."
      "And end to the use of temperament testing that results in killing animals
      who are not truly vicious ..."

      Page 200 - II. High-Volume, Low-Cost Spay/Neuter
      Spay/neuter is the cornerstone of a successful lifesaving effort.
      Low-cost, high-volume spay/neuter will quickly lead to fewer animals
      entering the ..."

      ?Page - IV. Foster Care
      "At some point in time, nearly every animal shelter feels the pinch of not
      ..."

      Regards

      Christina (Hart)
      ARRG Volunteer











      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------Let
      us find your next place for you! [
      http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/157631292/direct/01/ ]Need a place to rent,
      buy or share?
    • flyinthruworlds
      Hi Christina, thanks for the email below, unfortunately I don t know who Nathan Winograd is but appreciate that he was a speaker at a recent conference. I m
      Message 2 of 2 , Oct 7, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Christina, thanks for the email below, unfortunately I don't know who Nathan Winograd is but appreciate that he was a speaker at a recent conference. I'm about to critically analyse what you wrote, so that I and other can better understand the issues. I hope what i write is taken in the spirit in which i have written... as an exploration of ideas.

        The steralisation program Nathan refers to seems to reach a good outcome if people are using it who would otherwise not have steralised their pets. I wonder though if vets should be shouldering the cost of steralisation. It appears to me that it is a social issue and i wonder if it is appropriate to cause the private sector to bear the cost of responsible ownership. On the other hand, law societies and the law council encourages lawyers to do at least 10 hours pro bono (free) work per year, so why shouldn't other professions! Mind you there are more lawyers than vets and the economies of scale probably would not make much of an impact. Thus, a program would probably work better if it were government subsidised and regulated.

        Likewise, just because a set of statistics suggests that a law enforcing particular conduct does not work does not mean that the law itself does not work. It may mean that enforcement is too discretionary or the legal framework is defective and/or under resourced. It may also mean the study providing the statistics was produced in a way that skewed data or sought a particular outcome based on their hypothesis (the theory they were trying to prove or disprove). Law is not only about deterence, it is also about enforcing cultural norms. Sometimes a law can help create a cultural norm.

        Take the law against rape in marriage for example - that until recently was not an offence. In fact until recently it was impossible to have rape in marriage. This is because there was a presumption of consent (and I know this will get Ange involved in the discussion). This presumption has its foundation in property, that women were considered the property of the father then husband... thus the term 'man and wife' rather than the more contemporary 'husband and wife'. The practice of taking on the husbands surname is also a part of the old property paradigm. Though the law (prohibiting rape in marriage)itself may or may not be a deterent, it is based on what we in our culture do and do not except, irrespective of the context of the relationship. Thus the presumption has turned 180 degrees and there is now a presumption against consent. The law provides a moral basis (rights to personhood) and it also provides an avenue for enforcement for the victim, where that right has been infringed. The question then is, would rape in marriage reduce if there was no law against it but only programs to educate the rapists? A follow on question is: would we know of rape in marriage if the crime was not a crime and was thus unreported as a crime? Any police statistician would probably confirm that the rates of domestic violence for example spike in an upward trend when they carryout a marketing program to report and/or when there are more police resources. Thus, my feeling is that law and programs work together. They are mutually inclusive and their fields overlap. I think this is why the CLC project looks at law reform, legal advice and community legal education. Perhaps the programs make the law easiler to comply with. And perhaps the law makes it easier to identify and thus report a breach of cultural norm that has become law.

        Regarding animals, I am yet to see a study that shows a negative correlation between a law and a program. Such a study would have to show that a law either detriments or has no effect on the effectivenes of a program for a conclusion that law does not work but programs do. If anyone has such a study, or knows of one please upload it or let me know so I can study it, because I am very interested in this. I would be interested in looking at the actual study and not someones interpretation of the study.

        Regarding trying to coerce any organisation to spend its money in particular ways presents a number of issues. I had first hand experience this kind of issue when I was managing Lismore Unlimited Opportunities a few years back. Where non-members were trying to lobby our spending framework... to no avail. However regarding organisations such as the RSPCA, but the following rave is not specifically aimed at them but any such body. First money and assets in a balance sheet may be trust money and unless it is a discretionary trust, the money must be spent in accordance with the trust deed. Second, a trustee (eg the RSPCA)has a duty to invest and so long as an organisation invests and distributes in accordance with law (which includes the trust deed), any argument seems political. Third, I wouldn't characterise money donated or bequeathed to an organiation as necessarily 'public money'. I don't have the context of Nathan's discussion so I am unsure of his use of the words 'public money'. However, unless there are conditions attached to a donation, it would probably be that the organisation, being the recipient of the money, has a discretion on how to spend it. Although the scope of such spending would probably have to be within the constitutional framework of the organisation in question. Even money given by way of a government grant is not necessarily public money, it is more likely to be subject to a contract. Members of a corporate body (a corporation or incorporated association) can have a say on how money is to be distributed, however that would tend to be secondary to any trust deed. And, unless the organisational constutituion stated otherwise is more likely to be a general say on the framework rather than actually managing the spending. The old saying 'let the managers manage' comes to mind. Fourth, I would suggest that it is sound business practice not to use all of the principle capital on operational matters. In my limited experience, it is much wiser to build up a strong capital base, invest it and spend the distributed interest on operational matters. This way the organisation is sustainable and the interests of the donees continues into the future.

        Likewise although it is immensely sad that some organisations feel they need to use temperament testing before re-housing a companion animal. I can see good legal sense why they do this. Its about reducing liability for a negligence action.

        I hope this rave hasn't annoyed anyone, I'm aware that my tone can be taken in a way that I don't intend. I'm now on holidays and have more time to open my mind to different matters. And as you know, or as you may come to know, I enjoy a good dose of intellectual stimulation! So thanks Christina, keep posting...

        But i must again reiterate: i might be wrong about anything i have stated above as i am only a law student and have a lot to learn about the law, the universe and everything and any reliance on what i say or write would be unreasonable. Everything that i have said is my opinion only and is not intended to be nor is it legal advice.

        :-)

        Amber


        --- In NRanimallaw@yahoogroups.com, "Angela Pollard" <angela_pollard@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi Angela
        >
        > On Friday 2 October I tried to deliver the attached papers with a note
        > from Barbara Steffensen to the NRCLC, but of course you were closed. And
        > I could not find a post box there.
        >
        > So, I am attaching copies now, with the text of Barbara's note below, so
        > that you have them before the meeting on Tuesday afternoon, 6 October. I
        > shall also post them to you tomorrow. ARRG sends its apologies for the
        > meeting - neither Barbara nor I can be there.
        >
        > Another ARRG volunteer prepared the book extracts from Nathan Winograd's
        > 'Redemption' (2007) and highlighted bits. But these are not readable
        > either on screen or on a printout (!), so I'll quote those bits below too
        > - sorry about the bittiness of this, the result of no one person having
        > total control of a task. The highlighed bits of the RSPCA financial
        > statements seem to view OK.
        >
        > Barbara's note -
        > "Enclosed excerpts from Nathan Winograd's book 'Redemption' - a speaker at
        > the Animal Welfare League conference this week.
        >
        > He clearly states desexing laws won't work. What will work is high
        > volume/low cost-free desexing programs in all areas of Australia.
        >
        > The large wealthy national animal organisations should be required to use
        > a major proportion of their funds (public donations) on desexing high
        > volume/low cost and not accumulate vast money in shares unused to stop the
        > killing. These organisations should be accountable for using the public's
        > money in the right way and the most vital way is the stop holding on to it
        > and spend it."
        >
        > Highlighted sections -
        >
        > Page 28 - "... and ultimately impoundment and killing of their pets."
        > "LES ( Legislation, Education and Sterilization) ... 'there is nothing we
        > can do'."
        >
        > Page 29 - "... despite outcry from private veterinarians and their
        > associations when the program first began, there was no discernible loss
        > of business over time."
        > "... because the clinics were being used by poor people who would not
        > otherwise have had their pets altered."
        > "In 1976, the large national groups met for a second time ... ignoring the
        > success of publicly funded ..."
        >
        > Page 192 - "No Kill is achieved only by guaranteeing the following ..."
        > "Public shelters work with humane animal adoption organizations ..."
        > " ... must be the immediate goal of every shelter ..."
        >
        > Page 193 - "Immediate implementation of the following programs ..."
        > "High-volume, low- and no-cost spay neuter services."
        > "A foster care network for underaged ..."
        > "Trap-Neuter-Return or Release (TNR) programs"
        > "... is killed that all efforts to save the animal ..."
        > "And end to the use of temperament testing that results in killing animals
        > who are not truly vicious ..."
        >
        > Page 200 - II. High-Volume, Low-Cost Spay/Neuter
        > Spay/neuter is the cornerstone of a successful lifesaving effort.
        > Low-cost, high-volume spay/neuter will quickly lead to fewer animals
        > entering the ..."
        >
        > ?Page - IV. Foster Care
        > "At some point in time, nearly every animal shelter feels the pinch of not
        > ..."
        >
        > Regards
        >
        > Christina (Hart)
        > ARRG Volunteer
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------Let
        > us find your next place for you! [
        > http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/157631292/direct/01/ ]Need a place to rent,
        > buy or share?
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.