Animal Cruelty and turning a blind eye

Clare Bear

Or if people actually got more than a slap on the wrist when convicted they might think twice before they abuse an animal.

whitser

LadyTBolt wrote: »

Maybe ringing the cops may be a bit extreme if you do not have all the facts for certain. You could however call your local SPCA and advise them of what you have heard and could they investigate. Who knows, they may already know about it. They will investigate and they will not release the source of the complaint. Give them a ring and see. Your local number will be on their website. Animal cruelty cannot be ignored.

this seems a bit more level headed. a quick phone call to the ispca who can discreetly check it out. tbh if this man was involved im sure they already know who he is.

sorella

Amen to this.

A man here was convicted and fined a few hundred euro for starving a lurcher which he kept tied up to a table leg.

The judge decided not to ban him from keeping dogs....

we have a collie who was kept tied up to a large weight 24/7 because the owner had died and the family did not know what to do with her.

she was so thin; being fed but lonely and depressed.

so we fed her and then asked if we could have her...

Sometimes it is possible to do this; often not. The dept of ag are great re farm animals. The farmer who dumped the sheep left his ewes with no food in a grazed out filed; their necks were bald with sticking their heads through the fence to try to find food. We emailed them and they were there within two hours and sorted the man out.

But to walk past and do nothing?

Clare Bear wrote: »

Or if people actually got more than a slap on the wrist when convicted they might think twice before they abuse an animal.

EGAR

OP, if you have a name and address please PM me. They need to be stopped.

stevoman

OP my friendly word of advice. Deal with it how you see right. the guards may be too harsh, the ispca will look into it discreetly. Make sure though that you have good solid information before you tar a mans name, and please please please dont PM this mans details to anyone, as requested from above.

It may be bad enough if you get it all wrong on somewhons elses information, but to EMAIL the mans name and adress to somewhon you have never met over the internet and the it turns to third hand information passed though and internet form. Thats just wrong.

Whispered

EGAR wrote: »

OP, if you have a name and address please PM me. They need to be stopped.

stevoman wrote: »

OP my friendly word of advice. Deal with it how you see right. the guards may be too harsh, the ispca will look into it discreetly. Make sure though that you have good solid information before you tar a mans name, and please please please dont PM this mans details to anyone, as requested from above.

It may be bad enough if you get it all wrong on somewhons elses information, but to EMAIL the mans name and adress to somewhon you have never met over the internet and the it turns to third hand information passed though and internet form. Thats just wrong.

This has been dealt with in the past few hours through the authority the person who knows this man saw fit. I did not have to make a call, The other person decided to do the right thing. As pointed out by whisther (SP? sorry) , me saying "I heard....." doesn't cut it. But "I saw...." does. This thread was not supposed to be about one problem in partic, but animal welfare as a whole, I used my situation as an example, but really, the thread was intended to discuss animal welfare on a wider basis.


EDIT: While I really do appreciate your sentiments stevoman, and would agree in almost all cases, I know that EGAR is a very well respected member of the dog rescue "community". While I have not had any personal dealings with her yet, I have heard her name mentioned numerous times in other rescues I've done something with so if I needed to, or if I was worried about going to the authorities, I would have no hesitation in passing on any info I have and would trust it to be used correctly.

bilbo79

Its also worth noting that the people on here that are all for you either doing nothing or been sure!! are the fox hunters type and generally have a different outlook on animals than most animal lovers.

the people who would oppose the likes of fox hunting with hounds etc are all saying report..

let us know what comes of it please..

Whispered

bilbo79 wrote: »

Its also worth noting that the people on here that are all for you either doing nothing or been sure!! are the fox hunters type and generally have a different outlook on animals than most animal lovers.

the people who would oppose the likes of fox hunting with hounds etc are all saying report..

Now thats a whoooooooole other arguement

bilbo79 wrote: »

let us know what comes of it please..

Will do.

whitser

bilbo79 wrote: »

Its also worth noting that the people on here that are all for you either doing nothing or been sure!! are the fox hunters type and generally have a different outlook on animals than most animal lovers.

the people who would oppose the likes of fox hunting with hounds etc are all saying report..

let us know what comes of it please..

what nonsense. i never said dont repot dog fighting just that you need a bit more evidence then hear say. to which op agreed. if that man is involved i hope he gets whats coming.

Whispered

Can we get back to the topic of animal welfare responsibility in general, or has this thread died a death?

stevoman

helena.ryan wrote: »

EDIT: While I really do appreciate your sentiments stevoman, and would agree in almost all cases, I know that EGAR is a very well respected member of the dog rescue "community". While I have not had any personal dealings with her yet, I have heard her name mentioned numerous times in other rescues I've done something with so if I needed to, or if I was worried about going to the authorities, I would have no hesitation in passing on any info I have and would trust it to be used correctly.

helena, my point is that you shouldnt send on another mans details or name and address, espeically an 80 year old mans to ANYONE over the internet. Thats what i was concerned about. Guilty or not it is not fair and the party who alledgedly is breaking the law deserves the rights to be dealt with by the correct authorities and NOBODY on a animals and pet forum.


Im sure EGAR does a lot of good work and rescues etc but my point is only the authorities should be passed his name and address.

EGAR

Guilty or not it is not fair and the party who alledgedly is breaking the law deserves the rights to be dealt with by the correct authorities and NOBODY on a animals and pet forum.


Im sure EGAR does a lot of good work and rescues etc but my point is only the authorities should be passed his name and address.

Guilty or not??? What the ...? And you do you think deals with this dogfighting scum for the past 11 years? The Leprechauns? I don't do JUST rescue, I rescue *fighting* dogs and I know more about it than I care to remember. Young, old, ancient - I have met them all.

You don't know this guy by any chance, seeing that you stand up for him?

The Sweeper

To address helena.ryan's original point about animal welfare in general, there are a lot of grey areas.

Would most of us report someone who we saw beating their dog in the front garden with a cat 'o nine tails every Sunday morning? Yes, most probably we would.

But what happens when it turns to the grey area that is "animals who are not being looked after quite as well as they could be"?

I think that is the biggest problem. There's a thread on here at the moment about a badly behaved jack russell pup, and someone saying that they need to try and get the pup's owners to understand that she needs to be exercised and she shouldn't be fed scraps from dinner table plates.

I know plenty of people who own dogs that they don't worm as regularly as they should or whose dogs will walk around scratching for two or three weeks before they get flea treated. Plenty that don't get brought for daily walks. There are plenty of owners out there who own male dogs that they will never get neutered (because pups will never be "their problem").

Then there is the definition of cruelty. Some people are more harsh with their dogs than others. Jesus, some people are more harsh with their kids than others. What happens if my neighbour has a big dog, say a boisterous mastiff cross or something. When he handles it, he's very dominant - he'll shout, raise his voice very sternly, I've seen him physically shove it around when it doesn't do what it's told, but hey, it's about nine stone in weight. I'm pretty sure he'll belt it when it's not behaving itself. However, it sleeps in a massive sheepskin-lined bed in the house, is extremely well fed, its coat shines like a mirror, it's fully vaccinated, wormed, de-fleaed, it has toys, it gets walked - so what do I do? (That's just an example, but I have known people like that.)

Plus, you can get the wrong end of the stick. My cousin keeps horses. She has three warm bloods. Two are in work as dressage horses. The third is a 20 year old brood mare. The two competition horses are rugged nightly, worked daily, fed daily, they see the vet when required, they get acupuncture and equine massage. After they're worked they're washed down and combed out, re-rugged and put back in their paddocks.

The brood mare is a stand-offish grump. She's in a 50-acre paddock. You can't catch her unless you front with a pony on a halter. She gets fed throughout the winter and when feed is low in the summer drought and she has the grazing of the paddock the rest of the time. (She won't even be tempted by the feed bucket - you have to dump the feed out and back off before she'll come up to the fence.) There are sheep grazing in there with her at the moment. She doesn't get rugged up, because she won't let you catch her. My cousin bought her as a rescue seven years ago, and she was probably about 200-300lbs underweight when she arrived first. She'd been in a paddock with a lot of other horses and she wouldn't jostle for feed so she'd suffered accordingly. My cousin fed her up and got her condition back. She put her in foal twice in seven years, and while with foal she'll allow you to handle her (usually you have to lead the foal away first so she'll follow), and you can put her in a loose box and mind her. Soon as she's back in the paddock, she pisses off again.

From the outside, you might look and think "Woman has three horses, two useful, one older and not useful. She's obviously just looking after the ones who are working."

To me, breeding fighting dogs is obvious cruelty, but yes, you need your story straight before reporting the breeder. Would you report an 80 year old man who has six dogs, but you've no reason to think he fights them, you just don't think they get walked or cleaned up properly?

Whispered

stevoman wrote: »

helena, my point is that you shouldnt send on another mans details or name and address, espeically an 80 year old mans to ANYONE over the internet. Thats what i was concerned about. Guilty or not it is not fair and the party who alledgedly is breaking the law deserves the rights to be dealt with by the correct authorities and NOBODY on a animals and pet forum.


Im sure EGAR does a lot of good work and rescues etc but my point is only the authorities should be passed his name and address.

I can see where you are coming from, but in all fairness, if the authorities don't deal with this SOMEBODY has to. Or again, it brings up the whole question of where do you turn away and say "nothing to do with me, I've done my bit now". Well some people go further than that, they can't walk away. As I said, EGAR is very well known to most people with any interest in animal welfare, not just somebody on an pet forum.

You do make a good point, and I'm sure it's against boards rules to pass on info like that, so I wouldn't. However, if I had a problem and knew of someone who is fighting dogs and could get nothing done about it through local authorities, I would look up rescues for fighting dogs in Ireland to get advice. Guess who I would end up giving the details to anyway......

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

Would most of us report someone who we saw beating their dog in the front garden with a cat 'o nine tails every Sunday morning? Yes, most probably we would.

Of course, unfortunately what would most likely be happening is your neighbour is doing it out the back in a shed, or your neighbour has a dog one day, next day no dog, if this happened a few times you can be sure neighbour is "getting rid" of dogs he no longer wants. Especially if they are working dogs.

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

But what happens when it turns to the grey area that is "animals who are not being looked after quite as well as they could be"?

I know plenty of people who own dogs that they don't worm as regularly as they should or whose dogs will walk around scratching for two or three weeks before they get flea treated. Plenty that don't get brought for daily walks. There are plenty of owners out there who own male dogs that they will never get neutered (because pups will never be "their problem").

Yes I know people like this too, while it's not ideal, it's hardly cruelty to the point of needing to step in, although I must admit to trying to get people to get company for their lone pets or walk the dog more. But because I'd know these people, it's easier to help out, than give out. Some people just don't understand.

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

Then there is the definition of cruelty. Some people are more harsh with their dogs than others. Jesus, some people are more harsh with their kids than others. What happens if my neighbour has a big dog, say a boisterous mastiff cross or something. When he handles it, he's very dominant - he'll shout, raise his voice very sternly, I've seen him physically shove it around when it doesn't do what it's told, but hey, it's about nine stone in weight. I'm pretty sure he'll belt it when it's not behaving itself. However, it sleeps in a massive sheepskin-lined bed in the house, is extremely well fed, its coat shines like a mirror, it's fully vaccinated, wormed, de-fleaed, it has toys, it gets walked - so what do I do? (That's just an example, but I have known people like that.)

Yes, I have seen people with larger dogs behaving like this. But a shove or a jostle for a dog as large as a mastiff is nothing, and has to be done. I would prefer to see a submissive mastiff than a dominant one straining at the lead giving the breed a bad name and maybe being a danger. A dog this big needs to know who is boss. Although I don't think it needs to be done by belting it.

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

Plus, you can get the wrong end of the stick.

You can, my mother was advised against nutering her dog, and against walking him every day, due to leg problems. To people who don't know her, but can see the dog around the house every day, without getting out, it looks cruel. And he's the most spoiled little fecker going.

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

To me, breeding fighting dogs is obvious cruelty, but yes, you need your story straight before reporting the breeder.

I said a few posts back what happened there, he has been reported, and I didn't need to do it.

However, I also said that it is common knowledge, people know he's doing it. How straight exactly does a story need to be before you can have it investigated? "Sorry mister, I just need to take a few photos of your fighting dogs, hope you don't mind"?

Minesajackdaniels wrote: »

Would you report an 80 year old man who has six dogs, but you've no reason to think he fights them, you just don't think they get walked or cleaned up properly?

It depends on the man and the circumstances, If the man can't walk, lives in squalor, dogs are locked up all day etc it's no life for the man or the dogs. I would be more of the opinion that if the man has a family, talk to them. I would also consider calling up and asking him if any of the dogs are for sale, if he had that many I would assume that he got them younger when he had the capeabilities to look after them properly. Would not need to report in this case as there are other things that can be done, but if there was nothing else to be done, yes I would.


Can I take it that you might be of the opinion that obvious cruelty should be reported, less obvious cruelty, or neglect or something you can't be sure of should not be? Like you shouldn't involve authorities unless you're 100% sure something is going on in case you implicate an innocent person?

BryanL

your neighbour has a dog one day, next day no dog, if this happened a few times you can be sure neighbour is "getting rid" of dogs he no longer wants. Especially if they are working dogs.

Take a look on deals.ie plenty of adult dogs for sale, you can't always be sure people are "getting rid". you seem to have a big axe to grind with people keeping working dog?

I think in any case of cruelty report it to the relevant authorities the Gardai , dog warden or ISPCA. not some third party.

What appears to be neglect can be dealt with in many ways, the most neighborly would be to approach your neighbour to discuss it, what might look like a starving animal might be a very sick animal that is getting the best of veterinary care.

My own dad was reported to the Gardai last year for burning rubbish, 2 squad cars called to find him struggling to start a fire in the fireplace!
He was embarrassed to have gardai calling to the house and hugely disappointed that neighbors he's been living next to, some for 40 years, some much less would call the gardai rather than called around
Bryan

Whispered

BryanL wrote: »

your neighbour has a dog one day, next day no dog, if this happened a few times you can be sure neighbour is "getting rid" of dogs he no longer wants. Especially if they are working dogs.

Take a look on deals.ie plenty of adult dogs for sale, you can't always be sure people are "getting rid". you seem to have a big axe to grind with people keeping working dog?

I think in any case of cruelty report it to the relevant authorities the Gardai , dog warden or ISPCA. not some third party.

What appears to be neglect can be dealt with in many ways, the most neighborly would be to approach your neighbour to discuss it, what might look like a starving animal might be a very sick animal that is getting the best of veterinary care.

My own dad was reported to the Gardai last year for burning rubbish, 2 squad cars called to find him struggling to start a fire in the fireplace!
He was embarrassed to have gardai calling to the house and hugely disappointed that neighbors he's been living next to, some for 40 years, some much less would call the gardai rather than called around
Bryan

Hey Bryan, do I seem to have a problem with working dogs? if you take a look through some discussions here, I have said on many occasions that I think most working dogs are better adjusted than most pet dogs, a dog needs something to do. I have no problem with people keeping working dogs at all. As I said in the post, if your neighbour keeps working dogs, and seems to have a different one every few weeks then of course he's getting rid of them! What do you think is happening?

What has burning rubbish got to do with animal cruelty?

I agree the most neighbourly thing would be to call around if you suspected your neighbour was neglecting or abusing their dog. What if they were not approachable? Or what if they told you to p*** off and mind your own business or something. What then?

I'm amazed at the amount of people here that seem to think a persons feelings if they are innocent is more important than having a suspicion checked out.

Bryan, can I assume you are of the opinion that you should only report something if you are sure it is happening?

stevoman

EGAR wrote: »

You don't know this guy by any chance, seeing that you stand up for him?

Yes of course he's my grandad. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Your obviuosly not that smart if your asking stupid questions like that.

whitser

EGAR wrote: »

Guilty or not??? What the ...? And you do you think deals with this dogfighting scum for the past 11 years? The Leprechauns? I don't do JUST rescue, I rescue *fighting* dogs and I know more about it than I care to remember. Young, old, ancient - I have met them all.

You don't know this guy by any chance, seeing that you stand up for him?

no ones defending him egar. because he isnt guilty of anything yet.even though he's been tried over the net!
80 yr old men dont just take up dog fighting. if this man is involved he's likely at it his whole adult life. so in what could be a career of 60 yrs breeding and fighting dogs this man hasnt come to the attention of the cops???????if he has why havent they done anything????
problem with internet forums is they very quickly turn to witch hunts and make heros out of people.
if he is involved, hammer him.

Whispered

stevoman wrote: »

Yes of course he's my grandad. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Your obviuosly not that smart if your asking stupid questions like that.

Don't question somebodys elses intelligence with a spelling mistake in your post :rolleyes: And don't be insulting people or I'll tell your grandad.

stevoman

helena.ryan wrote: »

Don't question somebodys elses intelligence with a spelling mistake in your post :rolleyes: And don't be insulting people or I'll tell your grandad.

since when are you a mod?

The Sweeper

Hehe - just to point out, it's not that I believe that less than obvious cruelty should be ignored, but it's more that I'm an interfering busybody. If an aulfella who lived near me was doing what was, IMO, a crap job with multiple pets, I'd be round there meself, sticking my big nose in and offering assistance. When that nose got bitten off, THEN I'd be reporting them.

Whispered

whitser wrote: »

no ones defending him egar. because he isnt guilty of anything yet.even though he's been tried over the net!
80 yr old men dont just take up dog fighting. if this man is involved he's likely at it his whole adult life. so in what could be a career of 60 yrs breeding and fighting dogs this man hasnt come to the attention of the cops???????if he has why havent they done anything????
problem with internet forums is they very quickly turn to witch hunts and make heros out of people.
if he is involved, hammer him.

Excuse me? I find that insulting. How has he been tried over the net? I said I heard, I considered reporting, was told by people that my word wouldn't be enough, spoke to the person who told me who reported him herself. Where exactly is the trial?

And some people, while not defending him, are saying that you shouldn't report without being sure something is going on. Which is what I'm questioning. When do you have enough proof to get somebody investigated? Surely, if you suspect something is going on, the SPCA or dog warden can call up for a "routine" visit with no harm to the person involved. Do you need proof to get this done?

Again, I'm talking in general, can we leave my situation out of it for now, as it's been reported and is being looked at be the relevant people.

Whispered

stevoman wrote: »

since when are you a mod?

I was joking with you. FFS :rolleyes: Tell your grandad - geddit?

LadyTBolt

bilbo79 wrote: »

Its also worth noting that the people on here that are all for you either doing nothing or been sure!! are the fox hunters type and generally have a different outlook on animals than most animal lovers.

the people who would oppose the likes of fox hunting with hounds etc are all saying report..

let us know what comes of it please..

I have never heard such horse poop in my life. There is no comparison between fox hunting and animal cruelty.

Fox hunting is a form of wildlife control endorsed by the government and such hunting is legal. Animal cruelty is illegal.

Fox hunting is legal as it culls the harmful foxes who endanger other protected wildlife. Animal cruelty is illegal as it is the ongoing abuse of a harmless animal who has no choice but to be kept by an owner.

I despise animal cruelty and I would report it in an instant if I knew it was happening. Just because you are ignorant to the facts of wildlife survival you do not have the right to judge people. If you have an issue with fox hunting take it up on another thread. Do not use a thread opened for discussion on animal cruelty and welfare to show your dislike of fox hunting and the people involved in it.

stevoman

helena.ryan wrote: »

I was joking with you. FFS :rolleyes: Tell your grandad - geddit?

so was i. i didnt put in my smiley face!

Whispered

stevoman wrote: »

so was i. i didnt put in my smiley face!

Thats ok then. We need a kissy face for such misunderstandings.

BryanL

helena.ryan wrote: »

I agree the most neighbourly thing would be to call around if you suspected your neighbour was neglecting or abusing their dog. What if they were not approachable? Or what if they told you to p*** off and mind your own business or something. What then?

I'm amazed at the amount of people here that seem to think a persons feelings if they are innocent is more important than having a suspicion checked out.

Bryan, can I assume you are of the opinion that you should only report something if you are sure it is happening?

Helena,
what i'm saying is i would check out any suspicions myself, if they told me to p*ss off, i would while dialing 999. I think a neighbors feelings are important, it might just be that a neighbor calling around will get them to cop on! or explain the situation. I'm not advocating ignoring animals
Bryan

whitser

helena.ryan wrote: »

Excuse me? I find that insulting. How has he been tried over the net? I said I heard, I considered reporting, was told by people that my word wouldn't be enough, spoke to the person who told me who reported him herself. Where exactly is the trial?

And some people, while not defending him, are saying that you shouldn't report without being sure something is going on. Which is what I'm questioning. When do you have enough proof to get somebody investigated? Surely, if you suspect something is going on, the SPCA or dog warden can call up for a "routine" visit with no harm to the person involved. Do you need proof to get this done?

Again, I'm talking in general, can we leave my situation out of it for now, as it's been reported and is being looked at be the relevant people.

but you've passed an old mans details to a stranger over the internet,with out him knowing or been given a chance to speak for himself.
there's a right and wrong way of doing things.

Whispered

whitser wrote: »

but you've passed an old mans details to a stranger over the internet,with out him knowing or been given a chance to speak for himself.
there's a right and wrong way of doing things.

No I haven't - re read the thread please. Esp posts 37 & 45.

Whispered

BryanL wrote: »

Helena,
what i'm saying is i would check out any suspicions myself, if they told me to p*ss off, i would while dialing 999. I think a neighbors feelings are important, it might just be that a neighbor calling around will get them to cop on! or explain the situation. I'm not advocating ignoring animals
Bryan

I see what you mean, if you suspected you would see if you could find out for definate first.