EGAR IN THE NEWS FOR CRUELTY

snoman

snoman wrote: »

It's not really naive if we are not aware of 'the stuff going on in the background'. If you don't feel you can supply those details then don't judge me if I come to a different conclusion.

Having reread my post I realise it sounds a bit short. I didn't mean it to. : ).

Pumpkinseeds

There seems to be so much controversy surrounding well known rescues these days. I don't really know much about EGAR. I made the odd small donation in the past and the photos are quite shocking. I don't condone it for a minute. There's another well known rescue that has a facebook page dedicated to stopping them, claiming neglect/abuse of the animals taking place.

I don't have a clue what's going on in Irish rescue anymore. There is no justification for keeping animals in appaling conditions or allowing them to suffer. But sometimes I think people have an idea that Irish rescues are like bigger rescues that they see on tv and that have amazing facilities and high tech every thing when in reality they are mainly small independents operating from home trying to do the best they can with buggar all money.

dharma200

snoman wrote: »

It's not really naive if we are not aware of 'the stuff going on in the background'. If you don't feel you can supply those details then don't judge me if I come to a different conclusion.

there is enough online at this stage for anyone who wants to read, read the comments on facebook page, google her name and blog.. Interesting reading... There is a wealth of information on her past etc online now, it would seem the dam broke and it's all flowed out........

Raminahobbin

Magenta wrote: »

How do you know one of them was Chieftain? One of the photos of the dead dogs has what appears to be white fluff which I thought/hoped was VetBed, is it actually something much worse?

I'm as shocked as the rest of you, but have no sympathy for the woman. I'm not involved in dog rescue but saw many posts of hers on this forum over the years and she hadn't made a positive impression on me.

Chieftain is still alive, he's one of the dogs taken in by the GSPCA. There are pictures of him on their facebook page, named, from a year ago and more recent ones also, showing how he looked when he was found and how he looks now.

dharma200

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

There seems to be so much controversy surrounding well known rescues these days. I don't really know much about EGAR. I made the odd small donation in the past and the photos are quite shocking. I don't condone it for a minute. There's another well known rescue that has a facebook page dedicated to stopping them, claiming neglect/abuse of the animals taking place.

I don't have a clue what's going on in Irish rescue anymore. There is no justification for keeping animals in appaling conditions or allowing them to suffer. But sometimes I think people have an idea that Irish rescues are like bigger rescues that they see on tv and that have amazing facilities and high tech every thing when in reality they are mainly small independents operating from home trying to do the best they can with buggar all money.

Yes, and that type of rescue needs to be regulated. Look at the exemplary <snip> for instance... Why has every rescue in the country had difficulties and run ins with egar... I don't think anyone thinks that about the high tech thing etc.. But if <snip> can do it etc why can't other home run rescues... The very fact anyone can open a so called rescue up and collect donations can no longer be tolerated I feel. If we have one thing to thank her for it is she has opened people's eyes.

cocker5

Im going to be very honest and say there is NO excuse… EVER to put a dog (dogs) in that filth, dead corpses, starving… I don’t care “if life got on top of her”… ask for help.

The photos are very distressing to the viewer can you even imagine how stressed these poor dogs were.

I read her full statement of Facebook the day she upload and TBH she just kept expressing an “error of judgement”, she showed no remorse … no whatsoever.
So that twinned with the photos is enough for me. She should be shut down permanently.

I don’t agree with a witch hunt either, but someone needs to speak out on the animals behalf… after all they don’t have a voice.

tk123

DBB wrote: »

I know the score there and have done for a long, long time, as do most people who run rescues in Ireland. Because of this, I'm afraid I'm finding some of what's being said here is pretty naive. There's been so much stuff going on in the background that I don't know the half of, and so the general public realise even less.
.

Well a lot of it was hinted at/said on FB so that's why the account was closed I'd say(!) TBH I was surprised it stayed up so long! It does make sense of a lot of her anti-gspca posts though over the few years I've seen them on FB!

Magenta

dharma200 wrote: »

Why has every rescue in the country had difficulties and run ins with egar...

Exactly. She made a thread on this forum urging people not to donate to <snip>. Something about not being happy about their volunteers seeking donations in other parts of the country. What difference does that make to the <snip> dogs? The rescue needs that money no matter what town it came from.

Raminahobbin

cocker5 wrote: »

I read her full statement of Facebook the day she upload and TBH she just kept expressing an “error of judgement”, she showed no remorse … no whatsoever.

Yes, I read that too and it was the first thing I heard about the case. It instantly rang alarm bells for me. "Error of judgment", but absolutely no genuine acceptance anywhere in the statement that what she did was wrong. I think this is going to be a long and drawn out process of blaming everyone else but herself.

doubter

dharma200 wrote: »

Yes, and that type of rescue needs to be regulated. Look at the exemplary <snip> for instance... Why has every rescue in the country had difficulties and run ins with egar... I don't think anyone thinks that about the high tech thing etc.. But if <snip> can do it etc why can't other home run rescues... The very fact anyone can open a so called rescue up and collect donations can no longer be tolerated I feel. If we have one thing to thank her for it is she has opened people's eyes.

I've heard somewhere that <snip> also runs a pound, but I might be mistaken.i know for certain the <snip> does, and they have virtually 0% kill rate per year.
I'm trying to do it different myself. I run a sanctuary, which means I foster on a larger scale for rescue's. I usually care for about 10 animals that are not my own, cats, dogs and horses.I have rescue back up for all, but don't call on that unless i really need to.I don't need or want external funding, but if peops come to visit treats for the animals are always welcome.Maybe thats the way to go. I don't know. But I do know that something must happen so that this terrible ordeal for those dogs can never happen again.

dharma200

Removed as per post below

anniehoo

Folks, I know we're allowing this topic to be discussed but can we keep other rescues names out of it please. Thanks.

time lord

The court's sentence is a good example of how things can go in front of a judge. Regardless of evidence and time spent by volunteers or professionals on enforcement it may all seem hardly worth it to the individuals involved.
The state those dogs were in with unopened food and a carcass cobwebbed lying about only offer a glimse of what the dogs were being put through.
I believe as a nation our tolerance of animal cruelty is far too high. The results of this case only reinforce my opinion. A paultry message sent with such a low fine and people seeking to defend her through 'mittigating' circumstances rather than build on the facts. Most importantly the fact she was found guilty. Its now a matter of record beyond anyones guess work.
I dont say hang 'em high but anyone involved in similar acts will not be deterred in their actions one iota by a €250 fine. Well meaning is a subjective term open to anyones opinion and as ive said our tolerance of animal cruelty is too high.

doubter

dharma200 wrote: »

Removed as per post below

pm d you with explanation

Magenta

time lord wrote: »

people seeking to defend her through 'mittigating' circumstances rather than build on the facts. Most importantly the fact she was found guilty. Its now a matter of record beyond anyones guess work.

There were multiple people on FB responding to her critics saying things like "Let's see you do better" or "How many dogs have you rescued, get off your backside" etc. These people genuinely seemed to believe that what she was doing to these dogs was better than nothing. The dead dogs in those photos would have been better off euthanised in the pound than taken into her "care".

There really needs to be regulations regarding animal rescues. It seems like anyone can call themselves a rescue and they answer to no one until they are proven to be abusing animals. Sadly our government are more worried about country and western concerts.

dharma200

time lord wrote: »

The court's sentence is a good example of how things can go in front of a judge. Regardless of evidence and time spent by volunteers or professionals on enforcement it may all seem hardly worth it to the individuals involved.
The state those dogs were in with unopened food and a carcass cobwebbed lying about only offer a glimse of what the dogs were being put through.
I believe as a nation our tolerance of animal cruelty is far too high. The results of this case only reinforce my opinion. A paultry message sent with such a low fine and people seeking to defend her through 'mittigating' circumstances rather than build on the facts. Most importantly the fact she was found guilty. Its now a matter of record beyond anyones guess work.
I dont say hang 'em high but anyone involved in similar acts will not be deterred in their actions one iota by a €250 fine. Well meaning is a subjective term open to anyones opinion and as ive said our tolerance of animal cruelty is too high.

She was convicted under the old 1911 cruelty laws which have been completely overhauled. When she was charged in 2013 she was charged under these laws... Had she been charged under the new laws, the outcome most probably would have been completely different.

Vel

dharma200 wrote: »

I think for her own safety she has to step down,

she needs to issue a statement to say she is stepping from animal rescue and either appointing someone else to ru. Gears affairs, or shut shop completely.

I've seen many people, since this broke wonder will she now close her 'rescue', show remorse and learn from her mistakes.

In my opinion, people who find themselves in this situation don't think they have done anything wrong. They have a compulsion to take on and hoard these animals that they are unable to fight. Being caught is unlikely to be a deterrant to someone with these kind of mental health issues and this is what makes them so 'dangerous' because they just don't see what they have done wrong.

Magenta

Vel wrote: »

I've seen many people, since this broke wonder will she now close her 'rescue', show remorse and learn from her mistakes.

In my opinion, people who find themselves in this situation don't think they have done anything wrong. They have a compulsion to take on and hoard these animals that they are unable to fight. Being caught is unlikely to be a deterrant to someone with these kind of mental health issues and this is what makes them so 'dangerous' because they just don't see what they have done wrong.

Yep. They have the same attitude as the people who defend them, ie deflect back to their critics and ask what THEY are doing to help animals.

dharma200

I totally agree, <snip>.

Pumpkinseeds

dharma200 wrote: »

Yes, and that type of rescue needs to be regulated. Look at the exemplary madra for instance... Why has every rescue in the country had difficulties and run ins with egar... I don't think anyone thinks that about the high tech thing etc.. But if madra can do it etc why can't other home run rescues... The very fact anyone can open a so called rescue up and collect donations can no longer be tolerated I feel. If we have one thing to thank her for it is she has opened people's eyes.

I do think that a lot of people have an idea that Rescues are all nice modern pens with toys and plenty of people coming in to walk dogs and clean out runs and litter trays and do all the practical day to day things that are part of running a rescue. I've met a quite a few people who are surprised that they aren't like what they see on tv with RSPCA etc.

As I said there is no excuse whatsoever for the conditions those dogs were kept in or what they endured. I agree that there needs to be regulation around rescues but don't hold your breath on that so long as Simon Coveney is in charge.

GinaH

anniehoo wrote: »

Mod note: This has come up a few times since last week and we were waiting for a valid media source other than Facebook to allow this thread to run. As this is outside the normal remit of allowing discussion of a rescue, we will allow this thread to run as it has linked to a decent enough media link. The thread will stay open depending on how civil and factual it is kept by everyone.

Please only mention EGAR and no other rescues by name thanks..

<snip>
Mod: can you PM me with the relevance of this link. It seems to direct me to a closed Facebook group that discusses a rescue in the UK.

I Heart Internet

Upsetting images and reports.

http://www.thejournal.ie/animal-cruelty-galway-rescue-centre-1565936-Jul2014/

I had an argument with her on boards on an entirely different matter (not animal related) - puts that (and her charity work, more importantly) in a differnt light now.

wolfpawnat

cocker5 wrote: »

Im going to be very honest and say there is NO excuse… EVER to put a dog (dogs) in that filth, dead corpses, starving… I don’t care “if life got on top of her”… ask for help.

The photos are very distressing to the viewer can you even imagine how stressed these poor dogs were.

I read her full statement of Facebook the day she upload and TBH she just kept expressing an “error of judgement”, she showed no remorse … no whatsoever.
So that twinned with the photos is enough for me. She should be shut down permanently.

I don’t agree with a witch hunt either, but someone needs to speak out on the animals behalf… after all they don’t have a voice.

Having dealt with this individual before, I do not think she is capable of remorse. She has a very strong God Complex and in a situation where she was contradicted by several vets and legal professional, fully believed she was in the right.

She should not be made a scapegoat, but this should force more significant legislation with regards to the running of shelters. The dogs should not be returned to her and she should never be allowed keep more than ONE family pet ever again.

I know she was an avid boards user and a friend to some people here, but there is no condoning this. We all get snowed under in different aspects of life, but you don't allow NEGLECT and ABUSE. That is what these are. It is one thing not cleaning a cage for one day, it is another altogether to have dogs riddled in their own squalor and starving to death as tins of dog food rust unopened.

I have felt since my dealings with her that she is an animal hoarder. That is a mental illness. As others have said, she has a child and for herself and the child, she needs to get herself sorted. Honestly, if there is even a whisper of her getting any of those animals back, I would be absolutely sickened.

**Vai**

Disgusting news. 250 quid is a joke and how shes not banned from owning or rescuing animals is beyond me.

Last poster is dead right about the god complex. Just from when I used to frequent this board, she thought she knew it all.

Magenta

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Having dealt with this individual before, I do not think she is capable of remorse. She has a very strong God Complex and in a situation where she was contradicted by several vets and legal professional, fully believed she was in the right.

I have felt since my dealings with her that she is an animal hoarder.

I saw one FB post from a girl who had adopted a dog from her- apparently EGAR forced her to give the dog back for some flimsy reason and threatened legal action if it wasn't returned. She also mentioned what she thought was some sort of God complex.

time lord

dharma200 wrote: »

She was convicted under the old 1911 cruelty laws which have been completely overhauled. When she was charged in 2013 she was charged under these laws... Had she been charged under the new laws, the outcome most probably would have been completely different.

I hope your right but laws overhauled in other areas have had little effect on sentencing, I would wager the fine amount would have been the same either way. I wonder who paid the prosecution legal bill? Far more than €250.

Ps for another thread but you would be shocked by what happens if the €250 isn't paid. If you have ever had the Sheriff collect or checked their success in certain cases it would give you a whole new view of the country you live in.

dharma200

just for anyone interested:

Do animal hoarders often pose as rescue groups or sanctuaries?

Absolutely. Research shows many hoarders are beginning to set themselves up as “rescue shelters,” complete with 501(c)(3) not-for-profit status. They may appear to be sensible people, persuasively conveying their love for animals and readiness to take those who are sick and with special needs. Furthermore, the Internet appears to be becoming a great tool for solicitation.

“When looking to place an animal, it is easy for a person to get seduced by a pretty website,” points out Lockwood. “We need to caution people to look behind the curtain before giving over an animal.”

Here are several signs that a rescue group or shelter may involve a hoarder:

The group is unwilling to let visitors see the location where animals are kept.
The group will not disclose the number of animals in its care.
Little effort is made to adopt animals out.
More animals are continually taken in, despite the poor condition of existing animals.
Legitimate shelters and rescue organizations are viewed as the enemy.
Animals may be received at a remote location (parking lot, street corner, etc.) rather than at the group's facilities.

Source http://www.aspca.org/fight-cruelty/animal-hoarding/animal-hoarding-faq


Sounds completely spot on........

Magenta

One thing I remember about EGAR is that she would often post threads showing the neglected animals she had, as if seeking praise- I think I remember a couple of posters asking her if she was looking for praise. Then the charter was changed so that rescues could not be named, and the threads stopped. She would frequently post about Chieftain, the wolf hybrid that is now in the care of the GSPCA.

nala2012

Knew this case was coming up for a while and her statement after the case was an absolute joke. She didn't even pretend to be sorry. If she was innocent why didn't she release a statement before the photo's came out? I'm also shocked at how many people seem to be using the fact that she runs a rescue as an excuse for what she did! I think it's worse than if an everyday pet owner did this. No one would be offering any sympathy like she's getting and it really annoys me that people are saying the photo's are fake!

fiounnalbe

tk123 wrote: »

I'm not sure what to believe tbh. Anyone who likes their page on FB will regularly see that state that some of the dog are in when they come to her - they're like the dogs in the pictures maybe even worse? She states on FB that she had to segregate the dogs due to a bug going around and had no option but to put them in the old kennels that had been flooded. I've seen a good few rescues shut down because they can's take the abuse people give them on FB anymore - how do we know this isn't the same kind of vendetta?! On FB she said her solicitors are involved and the dogs are going back to her but looks like the page has been taken down...

It pi$$es me off that keyboard warriors are quick to speak up against rescues but have nothing to say about the owners who dumped them in the first place!

I agree about generally people giving out about rescues and not the people dumping them there, no one can please everyone 100% of the time, especially small rescues who don't have the resources as the big rescue charities and therefore obviously their places are not going to be as nice and shiny as the biggies.

However, there is no excusing what is in these photos. The only way I could forgive EGAR is if these proved to be fake photos...but since she pleaded guilty one presumes they are not.

Ok so they are old kennels that have been flooded and they were only being used because of a bug outbreak, thats grand no one would expect them to be top notch so...but that level of dirt and rubbish thats inside them is beyond a disgrace, no dog should have to sit in that even for a minute. How long could it possibly take to throw all the rubbish out and give the place a sweep??? It's disgusting and especially to treat dogs that have already had such a hard time in life to end up at this "rescue" anyways.

A corpse of a dead dog??? What, why and HOW?!?! I obviously don't know the cause of death, (I can only hope it was not due to neglect by EGAR) but any dead dog should be removed immediately, it's no wonder there was a bug in the kennels with a rotting corpse lying around. There is NO excusing this..NONE! No matter how busy or overwhelmed someone is, this should be top of their priority and not even taking into account anything else in the other pictures, a dead dog decaying in with other dogs in my opinion should be reason alone to have this rescue shut down.

I've read also people defending saying that the GSPCA have a vendetta against EGAR, again it's just my opinion but if she was running the place properly with nothing to hide then the random inspections from the GSPCA should not have bothered her.

Only 250euro fine is beyond a disgrace. I truly hope the dogs that were in the care of EGAR are found loving homes and not one of them ever has to set foot on that premise again. Personally I think she should be banned from ever owning any pet again in her life.