New Zealand Dog News

Reviewing the dog news in New Zealand with editors comments. Someone needs to keep reviewing how our dogs are doing in society.

February 23, 2010

Tim Shadbolt makes news as dog of an issue has its sequel at standards authority

Remember when the puppies were killed in Invercargill?~

Karen decided to do something about it, and complain to the TVNZ complaints

[4] Karen Batchelor made a formal complaint to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, alleging that the item had breached standards relating to controversial issues, accuracy and fairness.

[5] The complainant argued that the item was inaccurate, because the lineage of the euthanized puppies was unknown. She noted that the item’s introduction stated that Mr Shadbolt had said that the puppies were a cross between the Rottweiler and Mastiff breeds. She pointed out that, when footage of Mr Shadbolt was shown, he referred to the puppies as being a cross between Pit Bull Terrier and Rottweiler.

[6] Ms Batchelor contended that Mr Shadbolt did not know the breed of the puppies and that the SPCA had told her that its “best guess” was that they were a cross between the breeds Rottweiler and Huntaway.

[7] With respect to Standard 4 (controversial issues – viewpoints), the complainant noted that the issue had been discussed during an episode of Close Up the evening before and that both Mr Shadbolt and a representative from the SPCA had been given an opportunity to speak. She said that the news item had repeated Mr Shadbolt’s “unsubstantiated claims” that the puppies were Pit Bull crosses, which inferred that they would grow up to be dangerous. She argued that the item should have included the SPCA’s view expressed by its representative the evening before that no breed of dog was born “bad” and that, due to their age, the puppies were harmless.

[8] Ms Batchelor also contended that, because Mr Shadbolt and the Council were “unaware of how the puppies were bred”, it was unfair of the item to allow Mr Shadbolt to cast aspersions on Pit Bulls and Mastiffs and vilify the breeds. MORE>>

I would like to thank Southern Squall for alerting me about the sequence of events.


  • At 1:22 p.m., Blogger g said…

    to quote Mayor shadbolt.. "harden up"....
    "No kill" policies work if you have a big country with a big poulation... NZ doesnt have the end of the day someone has to make the hard call..

  • At 10:49 p.m., Blogger Brendan H. said…

    "No kill" policies work if you have a big country with a big poulation"

    Nonsense. It has nothing to do with size of a population. The bigger the population the more hungry dogs you have to feed. It has to do with how we approach dog ownership. Spain has a population of 46 million people. It has lots of homeless dogs that it can't look after. Sweden has a population of 9 million, but it doesn't have homeless dogs. So Sweden actually then helps Spain out by adopting many of theirs. I believe Tim Shadbolt's Invercargill city shelter kills 50 percent of it's homeless dogs. What's needed is some major adjustment to how we view dog ownership in this country.

  • At 1:03 p.m., Blogger g said…

    i think you will find all shelters are forced to euthanise 50-75% of adoptable dogs because people dont want to adopt them. Have a look at SPCA euthanasia figures... think you will find its over 50%...
    until you reduce the overall dog population and enforce neuter/speying then it will always be cheaper to get a pup from a mate than adopt from a shelter (currently $260-285 from SPCA!)

  • At 1:05 p.m., Blogger g said…

    How many of your friends, collegues and associates have adopted a dog from a shelter against how many have bought a pup or dog from a breeder/trademe/petshop etc...?

  • At 3:37 p.m., Blogger Brendan H. said…

    Of course we need to reduce the number of dogs not being spayed or neutered in NZ, I agree. That would solve part of our problem. But the point I was making is that what determines how many homeless dogs we have to look after is our attitude to how we look after them in NZ. Other countries don't require so many shelters so why do we? We are supposed to be a civilized organized country but too many people think it's their right to get a dog on a whim and then dump it at the local shelter if it gets slightly problematic for the owner. Too many people don't think about how big a dog's going to get. How their landlords feel about dogs. If they have enough patience and time to give a dog the attention it needs etc. So they dump their dogs at the pound, and when their lifestyle changes slightly for the better they go out and get a new dog and often repeat the whole cycle all over again.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

web page hit counter