12/04/2026
Feel-Good Animal Legislation/Feel-Good Fear Free Handling - The Devil Lies in What People Don’t See
I continue to witness the fallout from feel good legislation and handling protocols. This year alone I have worked with regulatory and shelter staff from over 20 Councils; the stories I’m hearing are truly disturbing.
In 2022 NSW Parliament passed legislation requiring Local Government Pounds to offer impounded dogs to rescue organisations prior to euthanasia regardless of behaviour issues; compliments of Emma Hurst of the Animal Justice Party and those politicians too ignorant to foresee the dangerous nature of this legislation.
To many this would seem like good legislation; giving all impounded dogs a second chance in a loving home. This is great if the dog is behaviourally sound. But, when the dog has behaviour issues that would put community safety at risk, this is outright stupidity and dangerous!
If it is reasonably foreseeable the dog is a risk to community safety, the dog should not be re-homed.
Myself and many others opposed this legislation at the time for numerous reasons: (i) The dogs received by rescue being a WH & S risk to staff, (ii) The potential for dogs with serious behaviour issues being re-homed with new owners/foster carers ill-equipped to handle the dog’s behaviour, and (iii) The safety of the greater community.
It is of note that no other individual or organisation is subject to this type of legislation. The RSPCA is the biggest killer of companion animals in New South Wales and continues to go unchecked by any such legislation.
To the general public the legislation seems just and gives everyone a feel-good feeling; dogs getting a second chance. But the general public don’t see the reality of the legislation. That is, dogs that have been re-homed or taken by rescue ending up back in the pound due to dangerous behaviour issues in the household or in the community. In one instance I am aware, Council tried to convince a rescue not to take a dog as it was a safety risk. The rescue maintained they had people apt to address the dogs’ behaviour issues. The next day the dog was returned to the pound after mauling someone. This attack was directly resultant of Emma Hurst’s Bill. It would not have happened if the legislation was not passed. There are many more similar incidents.
Then the problem is exasperated further by “no kill” rescues/shelters refusing to euthanise a dog for behavioural reasons and subsequently re-homing with dire consequences. And to really put the icing on the cake, dangerous “fear free” handling protocols being adopted by rescues and shelters putting the safety of staff further at risk.
Again, to the general public “fear free” handling sounds appropriate and just for shelters and gives everyone a feel-good feeling. But the general public don’t see the reality of these protocols. Yes, of course it is beneficial to the dog and handler to attempt to keep the situation as calm and non-aversive as possible but this should never be at the expense of handler safety. Staff in some shelters are expected to handle hyper-aroused dogs nipping, biting and jumping by way of redirecting with food or toys. Or alternatively, handlers are told to stand still or turn their back on hyper-aroused dogs while they jump, nip and bite. These methods seldom work and are extremely dangerous. Equally as bad, staff are being chastised if they restrain or correct a hyper-aroused dog jumping up, biting or redirecting aggression. The final clincher, staff are told to ask for consent from the dog before handling ....... Staff are being injured!
The legislative amendments passed in 2022 need to be revisited and replaced with sensible legislation in relation to the re-homing of dogs. Fear free handling in shelters and pounds needs to be investigated by Safe Work NSW. These unsafe methods are being embraced and pushed by the Pet professional Guild Australia and the RSPCA to the detriment of staff and community welfare.
