Australia - Six states..and that funny little island.

I hate to tell you this Lucas , but if the SPCA or the RSPCA got wind of it , they would shut her down. Un supervised an animal with an adjustable collar like that could get themselves into all sorts of trouble. We know of a girl that had a Grand Prix horse, she had him agisted in a paddock with one of those Lycra mane stays on. He got it caught it in the fence overnight, back flipped over the fence , broke his neck and drowned in the dam. The moral to this story is, if god didn't intend it, then it shouldn't be. Sorry but it just isn't natural. IMHO.
While I agree in many ways, 'not natural' can't be the reason behind shutting down a business. God didn't intend dog collars, neither horse shoes, bridals, horse blankets, sheep shearing, docking rings......antibiotics, cars and airplanes too, but they are all 'things' we use to do a job and all completely legal to use and sell. Some can kill in an instant, some are uncomfortable / not natural but considered needed to be a solution to a problem.

I get it if she has been shut down until the device is proven safe or humane, but 'not natural' can't be the only reason behind it. Probably was found to not be paying tax on them, that's normally the first thing government's gets bent out of shape over, got to have their tax's!
 
Last edited:
While I agree in many ways, 'not natural' can't be the reason behind shutting down a business. God didn't intend dog collars, neither horse shoes, bridals, horse blankets, sheep shearing, docking rings......antibiotics, cars and airplanes too, but they are all 'things' we use to do a job and all completely legal to use and sell. Some can kill in an instant, some are uncomfortable / not natural but considered needed to be a solution to a problem.

I get it if she has been shut down until the device is proven safe or humane, but 'not natural' can't be the only reason behind it. Probably was found to not be paying tax on them, that's normally the first thing government's gets bent out of shape over, got to have their tax's!

Yes, as you say Ben none of the things you have listed are ' natural ' , but all have been through stringent testing to be approved . I dare say that there are lots of items on ebay that could be considered ' hair brained ' ideas, but when it is to be used on animals it has to be certified safe to use. There are plenty of unscrupulous people out there that might use such a device to make a poor creature suffer .
Don't apologise for your opinion Lucas, we all have one. Ben and I will just have to agree to disagree on this one.
 
Don't get me wrong, I agree mostly. I just don't agree on the if it's not natural we should not use it part. As I said, highly likely that it has not passed what ever tests need to be passed before it's legal. When faced with that she has most likely folded up the little shop she was running.

I agree that things need to pass some sort of standard, especially when it's on an unattended animal or children.

Sorry you lost out a few bucks there Lucas, no one likes to see someone get short changed.
 
I hate to tell you this Lucas , but if the SPCA or the RSPCA got wind of it , they would shut her down. Un supervised an animal with an adjustable collar like that could get themselves into all sorts of trouble. We know of a girl that had a Grand Prix horse, she had him agisted in a paddock with one of those Lycra mane stays on. He got it caught it in the fence overnight, back flipped over the fence , broke his neck and drowned in the dam. The moral to this story is, if god didn't intend it, then it shouldn't be. Sorry but it just isn't natural. IMHO.

I agree fancy but I wonder if that was the only reason then why did she not return Luke's money? Think she might be a scammer....
 
Sorry to hear you got ripped off Luke! :(
I can find out where Liz got her collar from but she was not very happy with it. When we last chatted she had gone back to the second one she had made and was working on her own design #3

I am not sure, but she may have posted updates on the thread I posted earlier regarding collars.

I am not allowed to keep roosters and have made the decision not to try and do so; mainly because I do not want to risk losing my girls. If someone was to complain and draw attention from the local authorities to my small garden flock, I might risk losing them all. Under the radar etc
wink.png


Having said that, I admire Liz for trying to keep her little man. Her first hatch resulted in a pullet and a rooster and she is doing all she can to try and keep him, including sending flyers out to the neighbours and inviting comment and visits to see her set up. I know how attached she is to the little guy and having to part with him will be so sad for her. He does not seem too worried about wearing the collar and it does not appear to impede any of his activities. I understand her reasoning that the collar is a far better outcome than the fate of some roosters.
 
I agree fancy but I wonder if that was the only reason then why did she not return Luke's money? Think she might be a scammer....

Yes, and while it was only $10 , god knows how many $10 notes she scammed. All of our ebay purchases are through PayPal.
We bought an eventing watch that never worked. Yet in her pics the LED display was working. PayPal refunded our money and told us that they would pursue
Her. Sorry about your babies !
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom