Howdy dear availees and welcome to the 4th(?) post on this specific issue, and this post follows-on from the correspondence included in that immediate previous post...to quickly re-iterate, I became aware of issues re the Mt Gambier City Council's appalling Impound Facility and wrote to the Dog and Cat Management Board on Sunday 28th January 2024...(copy there-of in previous post-Ed)...indeed, and then completely unrelated, that Monday arvo (29th Jan) there was the near-infamous 'SAPol Respond To Animal In Distress Report' incident at the MGCC Impound...(and of course SAPol attended 'cos there is no RSPCA in Mt Gambier-Ed)...that's my understanding, certainly, and given that I still hadn't heard anything I emailed the DCMB again that Monday arvo and attached the video footage of the 'Animal in Distress' as posted to Facebook by a concerned citizen...(here's the copy of your email you asked for-Ed)...cheers, just drop it there...(here?-Ed)...right there...***
dcmb@sa.gov.au
Mon, Jan 29, 2024 4:43 PM
Dear Madam/Sir,
As per my unanswered email and attached correspondence yesterday regarding Mt Gambier City Council's appalling treatment of animale especially dogs, here is some footage just taken at the MGCC Works Depot.
I asked you to act immediately this morning and clearly you have not.
MGCC have refused to respond.
SAPol are in attendance for the welfare of the animal.
You are the responsible authority, please act immediately to protect these animals.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1035014950816552/user/1059870374/
Yours Nick Fletcher
***And roger me with a prize-winning leek (ack BlackAdder) if the DCMB didn't get like right on it, take like totes control, and rectify the situation...(I thought you said that the DCMB are a pack a' mouth-breathing half-wits far more interested in their own precious positions of privilege and alleged influence than the welfare of animals?-Ed)...I gotta' stop tellin' you stuff, clearly...(I don't understand why you do either-Ed)...point being, the DCMB did 'respond', albeit a dismissive, deceitful response sent at 1723hrs...and here 'tis...***
W: Mt Gambier City Council Dog Mistreatment
DEW:Dog and Cat Mngt Board
Mon, Jan 29, 2024 5:23 PM
OFFICIAL
Dear Mr Fletcher,
Thank you for your correspondence dated Sunday 28 January and Monday 29 January.
I understand you were seeking immediate action from the Dog and Cat Management Board. Please note, the Dog and Cat Management Board do not have any powers to remove Council’s authority under the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995. However, we will review the information and footage you have provided in relation to the detention facility approval and compliance with the Dog and Cat Management Act in detaining and disposing (rehoming) animals.
For
immediate action, I encourage you to engage RSPCA to report urgent
animal welfare concerns, as they are equipped and have the powers to
respond to such concerns.
Contact - RSPCA South Australia (rspcasa.org.au)
Animal cruelty complaints
24-hour
hotline: 1300
477 722
Alternatively,
fill out our online
cruelty report form.
Animals in emergencies
24-hour
hotline: 1300
477 722
Learn
more about our animal rescue team here.
Sincerely,
Ann
Gee
Manager
Dog
and Cat Management
81-95 Waymouth Street, Adelaide SA 5000
GPO
Box 1047, Adelaide SA 5001
dogandcatboard.com.au
***And I was somewhat less than impressed with that 'response' so I wrote to them again the next day, Tuesday 30th January 2024...again it's pretty much self-explanatory, so, have at it...***
Ms Gee,
I refer to my correspondence to the DCMB (letter 28th January 2024 + supporting documents/letters) and Monday 29th January regarding Mt Gambier City Council's appalling treatment of animals, particularly dogs in their 'care' due to being impounded.
I also refer to my repeated but unsuccessful attempts to contact you, the DCMB, via your phone message service.
Your, the DCMB's, eventual response, received via email at 1723hrs Monday 29th January is entirely unacceptable and inappropriate.
I identified to the DCMB that MGCC were/are keeping dogs in a tin shed and as of last week also a cyclone-wire cage, both located in the asphalt carpark of their Works Depot.
You, the DCMB, already knew/know this though because it was you, the DCMB, who approved this appalling and entirely inhumane 'facility'.
As I understand it, this 'Approval' was granted 'Site Unseen', that is, the DCMB has given MGCC license to operate this 'facility' without actually seeing what it is, where it is, etc.
Is this true, and if so why, and how is this appropriate let-alone lawful?
As you, the DCMB are already aware, because you, the DCMB did it, this 'license' to hold dogs for 72 hours was retrospectively granted to MGCC after they (MGCC) were caught-out deliberately breaching their 12hr-Hold License.
How and why was this 'retrospective approval' given, and why was no action taken against MGCC for this willing breach?
This 'retrospective approval' completely contradicts your (DCMB's) denial of responsibility for the current situation in your response to me;
“...the Dog and Cat Management Board do not have any powers to remove Council’s authority under the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995 .”
Given what has already transpired, your, the DCMB's, denial and explanation present as a deliberate deceit.
Worse, you, the DCMB, then contradict that statement by saying that you, the DCMB,
“...will review the information and footage you have provided in relation to the detention facility approval and compliance with the Dog and Cat Management Act in detaining and disposing (rehoming) animals.”
In one sentence you, the DCMB deny any and all responsibility, but next sentence then identify/define the exact responsibility/authority that the DCMB does have and that I have requested be exercised, that is, remove MGCC's 'license' to hold dogs.
I respectfully request actual answers to these questions because it must be established why this 'Approval' was given; the manner in which it was given; and to ensure that this disastrous result is never, ever repeated.
Your, the DCMB's, refusal to take responsibility for the horrendous circumstances/'facility' that you, the DCMB, have officially approved is unacceptable.
What I cannot figure-out is whether your, the DCMB's, apparent ignorance as regards the absence of the RSPCA in Mt Gambier, is a genuine ignorance or a more cynical denial of your, the DCMB's responsibilities and/or actions.
As you are aware, yesterday Monday 29th January 2024, SAPol were called to that 'facility' by a concerned member of the public, to rescue a dog in great distress.
As you, the DCMB, are aware, SAPol did attend, and they did so because there is no RSPCA in Mt Gambier.
You, the DCMB, gave MGCC official 'license' to operate this facility, you and you alone are ultimately responsible for what happens there, especially as it relates to the gross inappropriateness/dangerousness of this appalling 'facility'.
That poor dog was locked in that tin garden shed, and the moment MGCC became aware that SAPol had been called, MGCC staffer Derek Ferguson went to the 'facility' and opened the door of the locked shed.
Senior MGCC manager/staffer Jane Featherstonehaugh allegedly attended shortly after to 'inspect' and 'review the situation'.
These extraordinarily cynical actions by MGCC were intended by MGCC to deceive SAPol, the DCMB, and everyone else as to the genuine state of the 'facility'.
These appalling actions yesterday clearly define MGCC's contempt for all involved, including the DCMB and SAPol, and show exactly how cynically and deceitfully they are prepared to conduct themselves, rather than take responsibility for their disgusting decisions/behaviour.
This entire fiasco is purely economics-driven because of MGCC's gross financial mismanagement, and MGCC has acted with definable contempt for Ratepayers, our pets, and for the DCMB, SAPol, etc, but it is the DCMB who have empowered MGCC to act like this.
This 'facility' issue is literally tip-of-the-iceburg as it applies to MGCC's appalling conduct, eg, dogs are disappearing from the MGCC 'facility' and then re-appearing at interstate pounds/shelters.
I repeat my request that the DCMB act immediately, today, and remove MGCC's 'license' to hold animals.
***(Sweet baby cheeses, no wonder these people hate you, you actually 'literally' beat them back into a corner and then metaphorically slap them all-up side the head-Ed)...one does what one can...(in a sortta' "stop hittin' ya'selves" kinda' context-Ed)...if you mean that I cause discomfort for some by pushing their own behaviours back-up into their own faces, then sure, and I'd be more than happy to see any and/or all of these clowns/stooges completely 'dis-arm' me by not being so gourd-awfully incompetent and/or corrupt!...(you say words, but all I hear is 'Slap Slap Slap'-Ed)...well then, hear this, Slap!!!...(ouchhhh!!! aha-Ed)...and for the benefit of dear availees playing-along at home, I just mimed slapping Ed as he clapped his hands together and feigned a re-coil, etc, etc...(purely for comedic effect-Ed)...and just to lighten the mood further, we now return you to our usual programming...(ooo more slapping, I love it-Ed)...well by the Friday I hadn't heard any response from the DCMB re my letter above of the previous Tuesday, etc, and so I wrote again...***
Ms Gee,
As per my previous letters to you, the DCMB, regarding the approval granted by the DCMB to Mt Gambier City Council for their inhumane Dog Pound Facility.
As you, the DCMB, are aware, because I've written to you repeatedly and explained it to you, this 'Pound' is actually a Tin Garden Shed/Cyclone-wire Cage, both on asphalt, jammed into a corner of MGCC's Works Depot carpark.
As you, the DCMB, are also aware, that Cyclone-wire Cage was only added last week as a supposedly appropriate way to address the 36C+ temperatures and resultant extreme stress/injury to the dogs being held there.
You, the DCMB, could apparently be initially, partially forgiven for officially approving this 'facility' because you granted MGCC approval 'Site Unseen', that is, without conducting any sort of site inspection.
It is immediately obvious from the granting of MGCC's approval that this lack of inspection and/or any apparent appropriate oversight by the DCMB is total, that is, the granting of this approval defines that you, the DCMB, have conducted absolutely no 'Oversight Process' at all.
You, the DCMB, have clearly not seen even a basic plan/summary/outline from MGCC as to what it was they intended, and that you, the DCMB, approved.
It is obvious because no-one with a shred of human decency is going to approve that facility if they have the slightest idea what is being proposed.
However, in today's The Border Watch newspaper MGCC is quoted saying that they received DCMB approval after providing “self-assessment, site plans, and photos”.
So you, the DCMB, you are the Dog and Cat Management Board and, apparently equipped with all the information/details you, the DCMB, requires to grant MGCC a 'Pound Approval', have 'licensed' that appalling facility.
And to that specific point, I only found out yesterday that I've grossly underestimated just how vilely callous and inhumane MGCC are, because I didn't realise that the Tin Garden Shed is the entire 'Impound Facility'.
I had thought that a very small section of MGCC's Work Depot carpark had been fenced-off to create a yard, and that the Tin Shed was just the kennels part of the larger 'Pound' for securing dogs at night, etc.
But as you, the DCMB, know, or apparently didn't know at all, the Tin Shed is it, that appalling little Tin Shed sitting in the middle of an asphalt carpark, that is MGCC's Dog Impound.
I respectfully request that you, the DCMB, provide me with any and all detail in your possesion as to what plans/information was provided by MGCC that satisfied you, the DCMB, to approve this appalling 'Impound Facility'.
It is my understanding that several senior MGCC staff attended at their 'Pound' on the Monday afternoon/evening, following SAPol attending the site, and that MGCC have since declared the facility to be 'just fine'.
As you, the DCMB, are also already aware, 1) there is no RSPCA in Mt Gambier and that as a result 2) SAPol attended at the MGCC 'Impound' in response to an 'Animal In Distress' call from the public.
SAPol attended to rescue a dog in distress (the video footage of which I have already provided) from the MGCC 'Impound' that you, the DCMB, approved.
The DCMB should also be aware that at this time some in Mt Gambier are contemplating legal action for the appalling, inhumane conduct on this matter, and that you, the DCMB, are firmly in that frame as being the 'Authority' that not only approved this in the first instance, but now refuses to take responsibility and act to rectify the situation.
Should others proceed with any litigation, I will immediately provide them copies of my correspondence to you, the DCMB, to prove that you, the DCMB, know/knew exactly what is/was happening and that you, the DCMB condone and support it, and outright refused to act.
You, the DCMB, have not just allowed this to happen, by refusing to act to rectify it and therefore effectively protecting MGCC, you define yourself, the DCMB, as being wantonly complicit in the gross abuse of animals.
You, the DCMB, know the extraordinary trauma and stress this appalling conduct by MGCC is having in the community, and you, the DCMB, know what it is you can do to address that.
Again, there is very hot weather forecast across the weekend, 30C+, and MGCC have just declared that appalling facility to be 'just fine'.
So again I implore you, the DCMB, to act immediately and remove any approval/license from Mt Gambier City Council to operate any sort of 'Animal Impound Facility', and have any and all animals 'Impounded' by MGCC instead taken to the fit-for-purpose South East Animal Welfare League shelter on Penola Rd.
As you, the DCMB, are aware, I have provided the SEAWL a $1,000 surety to cover any immediate costs associated with my request to have any/all animals removed/impounded by MGCC immediately taken to the SEAWL facility.
Mount Gambier City Councillors and senior staff have proven themselves as individuals, let-alone as a Council entity, to be wholly unfit persons to have any animals in their supposed 'care'.
As I conclude this latest correspondence to you, 1315hrs Friday 2nd February 2024, I have still received no response from you, the DCMB, to my letter of *Monday 29th January 2024*, not even a polite 'Email Received'.
All I have is your, the DCMB's, response directing me to call the RSPCA, denying any and all responsibility, but then saying that you, the DCMB, will look into that “approval” if I send more information and/or footage.
This is not just completely self-contradictory, but the statement about 'more footage' is outright offensive, and reeks of bureaucratic indifference and mockery.
Just exactly how many dogs do you, the Dog and Cat Management Board, need to see/hear in high distress in a facility you, the DCMB, have approved, before you, the DCMB, act to rectify the inhumane disaster you, the DCMB, have not only created, but now allow to continue?
Even if you, the DCMB, claim complete ignorance as to what MGCC are doing, I have clearly identified the appalling conditions/situation, for which you, the DCMB, are the 'Oversight Authority', and therefore responsible for both the approval and continued functioning there-of, and I have provided you, the DCMB, with an immediate, viable, and 'paid-for' solution.
Again, please, I formally request that the DCMB act immediately to protect these highly vulnerable dogs because Mt Gambier City Council have indicated that they do not care and intend to continue forward exactly as they have behaved thus-far.
(*Apologies dear availees, doing this post I just realised that should be Tuesday 30th January, not Monday 29th as written which was the email as above.)
***So as self-described, that letter was emailed to the DCMB that Friday arvo, and they got right on it again/eventually, but unfortunately couldn't quite get their lengthy response/denial finished and then emailed until 1704hrs, four minutes past the close of business...***
Dear Nick Fletcher,
I acknowledge the letters you have sent to the Board dated Tuesday 30th January and Friday 2nd February since my previous reply Monday 29th January.
In response to your questions regarding approval process:
The Board have an established policy for the Approval of Detention Facilities for Dogs and Cats. The Board ask councils to advise them of new detention facility plans as early as possible, to ensure compliance with the Board’s Detention Facility Guideline. New detention facilities must be inspected and approved prior to use. As you have identified, approval was not attained by the City of Mount Gambier prior to use, and this was rectified.
Facilities are assessed against the minimum requirements set out in the Detention Facility Compliance Checklist. Inspections may be conducted by DCM Unit Staff, a representative directed by the Board or a council representative. If a self-audit by council has been undertaken, DCM Unit staff will review this for compliance. Assessment can include the provision of supporting evidence of mud maps, photographs and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
The Board approved the City of Mount Gambier 72-hr detention facility July 2023.
Section 32A allows the Board to report Council failure to discharge responsibilities under the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995 to the Minister to whom the administration of the Local Government Act 1999 has been committed (with a view to that Minister taking action in relation to the council under that Act). As the Council worked quickly with the Board to resolve this matter, and the facilities met the requirements and were approved, escalation of this matter was not warranted.
Compliance assessments regarding third parties are not publicly available, therefore the Board is unable to fulfil your request to provide any and all detail in possession as to what plans/information was provided by the City of Mount Gambier to approve the facility. Should you wish to pursue access to this information, please consider submitting a Freedom of Information Request through the Department for Environment and Water.
The Board cannot direct a Council to engage in a service or supply arrangement, therefore the Board is unable to fulfil your request that animals seized by the City of Mount Gambier are taken to the SE Animal Welfare League.
Questions from previous correspondence you have requested are clarified:
You asked that “DCMB act immediately to remove from MGCC any and all approvals/ licenses to 'manage' dogs”. I advised that the Dog and Cat Management Board do not have any powers to remove Council’s authority under the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995. I apologise if there was a misinterpretation, and what you were asking was limited to the approved impounding facilities. The Board do not have powers to remove council’s ability to appoint authorised officers to undertake their roles and responsibilities prescribed in legislation.
You asked “DCMB act immediately, as in, first thing Monday morning 29 January 2024 to allow as much time as possible for other arrangements to be made for the dogs”. I advised that we would review the information and footage you provided in relation to the detention facility approval and compliance with the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995 in detaining and disposing (rehoming) animals. I can confirm that on Monday we followed up your report, and throughout the week spoke with the Council, the attending SAPOL officer as well as deploying a staff member to the site to conduct an audit.
The City of Mount Gambier have been advised of the outcome of this assessment, and the facility remains approved for 72-hour detention. The Board is satisfied that the council has procedures in place to monitor and cater for the health and wellbeing of dogs kept at the facility. I understand that this outcome is not the one you were seeking.
Under section 270 of the Local Government Act 1999, all councils must have a policy and procedures for reviewing their decisions and actions for decisions. If you feel aggrieved by an action or decision of Council, you may put your concerns or complaint in writing following the council complaint/review process. Complaints of misconduct or maladministration of councils of the public service can be reported to the SA Ombudsman for investigation.
Yours faithfully
Ann Gee
Manager
***And we're gunna' conclude today with an on-line article (link attached) and ask that availees pay special attention to the "Senior Project Officer" MGCC refers to (below) and claims to have asked to inspect, etc, and how that compares to what the DCMB wrote to me (above)...***
https://www.miragenews.com/impound-facility-approval-reconfirmed-1166595/
Council's impound facility located at the City of Mount Gambier depot has been audited by the South Australian Dog and Cat Management Board, and the existing approval has been reconfirmed.
The additional audit was arranged by Council following community concerns shared on social media regarding the welfare of impounded dogs in our care during warmer weather.
"We want to allay any concerns regarding wandering dogs in our care, so we invited a senior officer of the Board to come down from Adelaide to inspect Council's facility and discuss our process and procedures when handling dogs," General Manager Corporate and Regulatory Services Jane Fetherstonhaugh said.
"Our facility was already approved to hold dogs for 72 hours in accordance with the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995 in July last year, but given recent community concerns we wanted to ensure that we continue to follow the Dog and Cat Management Board's guidelines."
A Dog and Cat Management Board Senior Project Officer inspected Council's temporary impound facility this week and the Board has formally advised Council that it is satisfied with the facility.
"During the visit, we also discussed preliminary plans for future impounding facilities, as we'll also need to consider and plan for the potential requirement to impound cats in the future which is under consideration as part of the current review of the Dog and Cat Management Act," Mrs Fetherstonhaugh said.
Wandering dogs are housed in Council's temporary pound during the 72 hour hold period.
"We keep the dogs as safe and comfortable as possible until we can reunite them with their owner, or transfer them to one of our partner organisations for rehoming."
"During warmer days we visit the temporary kennel frequently to ensure dogs have access to food and water. We also monitor the temperature inside the kennel and if required, hose down the floor, and the dog and enable outside access within an enclosure."
"We have installed shadecloth on the outside enclosure and we have a small plastic children's swimming pool for use on hot days. We continue to investigate making other improvements such as roof ventilation in the kennels and an additional shade sail over the holding pen."
Council's impound facility was constructed in accordance the Dog and Cat Management Board Detention Facility Guidelines which outline that dog pens must be fully enclosed and constructed from impervious, washable and durable materials.
"In comparison to the comforts of home, the facility may appear basic. However, these specific requirements are outlined by the Board to meet health and safety standards for the dogs and our staff," Mrs Fetherstonhaugh said.
***And we're just gunna' pull stumps here 'cos there's a lot to get through and next post we'll be referring back to all of this correspondence in these last 2 posts, etc, so it'll hopefully be easier/possible for dear availees to have these several posts on different 'tabs' of this 'ere blog, and be able to just go 'tab-to-tab-to-tab' where/when necessary rather than trying to go in and out of individual posts...(well that's as clear as mud-Ed)...it's the best I can manage right now...(fair enough-Ed)...
Tomorrow: More Dog Blog Fodder
I'm Nick Fletcher and this is my blog...cheers and laters...
No comments:
Post a Comment