In our previous updates we have referred to the article in The Daily Advertiser (https://www.dailyadvertiser.com.au/story/3199408/pound-taken-off-the-leash/ where it states, “…a volunteer used her own social media to find a home for an abandoned animal…” In this article Council is quoted as saying, “She had taken an image of an animal and posted it online to arrange for its collection. …I can understand her attempt to help an animal, but it went above and beyond what is appropriate for a volunteer.” At this time there were no volunteers at Wagga Pound as the volunteer program had been suspended to address OHS issues. However some of us had continued to visit Wagga Pound as members of the public.

These statements in The Daily Advertiser are not only completely inaccurate, but we think have never been addressed by Wagga Council. We refer to this as “The Baz Incident”.

Our story - Myriam and Belinda had visited Wagga Pound on Wednesday afternoon in May 2015, and observed a dog in the two cages known as “Alcatraz”. These two cages were separated from the other dog kennels by a brick wall. That same Wednesday in the evening, when Belinda was looking through her notifications on her phone, she saw that she had been tagged to keep an eye out for a dog called “Baz” who was missing. Belinda was convinced that this missing dog was the same dog she and Myriam had seen that Wednesday afternoon at Wagga Pound in the cages known as Alcatraz. Belinda contacted the owner and asked them whether they had been to the pound. They replied that they had been to Wagga Pound 3 times in the past two days, looking for their dog. They had even taken in a photo of their dog Baz to show pound staff. When Belinda explained to them that she thought their missing dog Baz might be the one held in Alcatraz, the owner replied that they had been shown the dogs in the dog kennels but they had not been shown the dog held in Alcatraz.

The owners went again to Wagga Pound the following day (Thursday) and identified that the dog held in Alcatraz was indeed their missing, loved pet. They went early in the morning (outside the regular public opening hours) as Thursday is one of the euthanasia days at Wagga Pound, so they were very concerned. Not only was Thursday a euthanasia day but they had already been to the pound 3 times in the past two days and had not been shown their dog. People in Wagga had concerns over their pets, as a pet microchipped dog named Cindy had recently been euthanised at Wagga Pound before her due date. When the owner came to collect Cindy they were initially told by Council that their dog had “escaped”. This was not true. Their pet dog had been euthanised prematurely. See reference in The Sun Herald article: (https://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/cats-found-in-freezer-at-wagga-wagga-city-council-animal-shelter-20160331-gnuqdn.html

In the Daily Advertiser article Wagga Council states, “She had taken an image of an animal and posted it online to arrange for its collection.” The only photo that we are aware of, was the photo placed on social media by the owner themselves. No “volunteer” had taken a photo of this animal. The advice Belinda gave to the owners of Baz was to go to Wagga Pound and have a look for themselves (even though they had already been 3 times), to see if the dog that was being held in Alcatraz was their pet dog - which it was. We contacted Wagga Council in regards to this article and raised our concerns.

- Why did Wagga Council assume a former volunteer had taken this image and posted it online?

- Why did they assume a former volunteer would arrange for its collection?

- Why did Wagga Council go to The Daily Advertiser with this information?

- Why didn’t Wagga Council check that the information they were giving media was accurate? Why didn’t they contact the “volunteer” to hear their side of the story, especially before going to media?

- Did The Daily Advertiser ask for a copy of this photo?

- If the rangers knew the dog Baz was at Wagga Pound, why weren’t the owners shown their dog? The owners had been to the pound 3 times in the last two days and had even taken in a photo to help identify their pet.

- At a meeting we had with Council, we showed them a copy of the photo that the owners had placed on social media and asked if this was the photo Council was referring to. Council indicated this was the photo. Why was Council then blaming a “volunteer”?

- If the rangers did not know this dog Baz was there (except for the ranger who had impounded the dog), who was giving this dog water, food and checking on its welfare? How were staff complying to legislation?

- Were there policies and procedures in place at Wagga Pound that kept all staff working at Wagga Pound informed as to which animals were impounded and where they were held?

- If there weren’t policies and procedures in place why did Council management find this acceptable?

- Did animals arriving at Wagga Pound get entered on the Impound Register immediately? If they were entered immediately on the Impound Register why weren’t the owners shown their dog? There is no acceptable excuse to not show an owner their missing pet.

- If the Impound Register was not kept up to date and animals were not entered immediately on the Impound Register how did all staff employed/rostered on at Wagga Pound know which animals had been impounded? We saw the inaccurate statistics that were placed by Wagga Council on its website that showed many animals unaccounted for.

- When animals were placed in Alcatraz, was this noted and communicated between staff members? We had seen animals left in Alcatraz before and they appeared not to be appropriately cared for. 

After this article appeared in The Daily Advertiser, we spoke to the police questioning what evidence was required by Wagga Council to make such accusations. From the information given to us by the police, we requested this information from Council:

“If this image exists we are requesting Council:

- To provide us with a copy of the image supposedly taken.

- The time the image was taken.

- The date the image was taken.

- The place where the image was taken.

- The website the image was placed on, and the time and date it was placed on the website.

- The evidence to show how it was tracked back to the volunteer and how that evidence was collected.”

We also asked these questions in a letter we sent to The Daily Advertiser. We asked for our letter to be published. We accept that it is The Daily Advertiser’s choice as to what they publish. Our letter was not published. Our questions have never been answered.

We will never understand why Wagga Council chose to go to media with this inaccurate story. We think Council wanted to portray “volunteers” in a poor light and excuse their lack of proper procedures at Wagga Pound. For an owner not to be shown their dog when they had been to the pound 3 times in two days is unacceptable. As Dr Michelsen stated in his review, “Currently much of the day to day functioning of the Shelter is not defined in a protocol or procedure and has been taught to new staff by existing staff, or through the application of “common sense”. While this informal system can be effective, it leaves management largely blind to what is actually occurring at the facility and very dependent upon one or two key staff for training and continuity. The loss of key staff or misunderstandings by staff can lead to serious systems failures.”

We still would like to see what evidence Council have to support their statements. We have asked Council on numerous occasions for their evidence and a copy of this photo. We have never been shown this photo by Council. As stated earlier, Council indicated to us that the photo they are referring to is actually the photo posted on social media by Baz’s owners, so nothing to do with “volunteers” at all.

After this incident both Belinda and Myriam were banned from visiting Wagga Pound as members of the public. When Myriam queried why she was banned, she was informed by Council staff that there were too many leaks. As we visited Wagga Pound only in public opening hours there should not be anything for us to leak.

To this day Wagga Council has never had the integrity to admit that they were misinformed or that they wrongly accused a “volunteer”. Our questions remain unanswered and the inaccurate information given to the public has never been corrected.

Note: The article cannot be viewed unless you are a subscriber to The Daily Advertiser. However, the comments made by readers can be viewed if you click “comments”.