Injured dog: Carry out or leave him?

at the end of the day you have to make your own call and run with it. as long as you've thought it through and you're happy with it... then thats your valid call even though some may argue against it... some people may be able to disconnect themselves from a dog more and be more clinical and black and white about the decision.. others will stand by their dog like any other close member of heir family, its hard not to with a pet dog. it can feel like a major betrayal of the trust and loyalty they show us, to abandon them. unfortunately a dog will never understand all the potentially complicated issues involved in a decision like this and how much power we hold over what happens to them... and how conditional the relationship can be sometimes

Your on good form this morning wayno

i couldnt get a dog across a swing bridge when the waingawa in the tararuas was in full flood... we got the dog to swim, it quickly disappeared downstream very rapidy, and out of site and tht was the last we saw of it on its way into a gorge.... that was pretty horrible, the dog leapt in the river in good faith because we called to it knowing it would... i felt like i betrayed the dogs trust... i'd have to live with that.. a few minutes later i turned around to see the dog standing behind me , as happy as Larry...

I'd think that if you were regularly taking a dog into the hills and were worried about this scenario, it might make sense to have a non PLB communication option and a plan. Inreach or Spot device or similar and a plan, someone back home with contact details of helicopter operators who could help. For one thing, going directly to the closest helicopter operator and getting them to fly in directly to you with an appropriate sized machine is going to be a lot cheaper than reimbursing SAR for the response they come up with when you activate a PLB. They're going to call in a bigger machine, possibly from much further afield, and put a team on board to cope with whatever might come up. Whether you get in trouble when they find it's about your dog, and or you are forced to reimburse them, or you chose to reimburse them for their costs, it's going to be way more expensive than going direct to the closest local operator. There's also the issue of diverting and risking SAR resources for something that's not their purpose. I'd be thinking carefully about time of day, weather and your position before activating a PLB, they're going to assume a persons life is in danger and go all out if a PLB is activated. They may also call out police and or volunteer ground teams in case they are needed. In many cases you might be best tying up the dog, making it comfortable and hoofing it to the nearest place with cell phone reception, organising a rescue and then returning to the dog. There wouldn't be many places you'd go with a dog where you couldn't get to phone reception in under half a day? OK, a fair chunk of the West Coast river valleys might be further away from help than that, but elsewhere you'd mostly have options.

Just such an awful scenario happened recently... https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/103317570/lost-after-a-cliff-fall-how-pip-the-dog-survived-10-days-in-the-bush

I have a bit of a drama that happened whilst tramping with 2 dogs in the Richmond range. We were decending the track from Browning hut and close to Roebuck hut when my retriever just collapsed and couldn't stand up. We were on a week long explore and i had plenty of food,some dog bikkies and a rifle to get dog food.I ended up carrying him on my front to roebuck hut where we rested for 2 days. He was able to walk for 5 or 10 minutes at a time after that so it was more carrying him down the pelorous to the road end. We did this over another 2 days. As my car was at the Aniseed valley end where we started i needed to hitch hike back to and past Nelson to the car. I tied my 2 dogs at the road end with an ice cream container of water and 4 tux biscuits each early in the morning, and then walked to the main road. Hitched through with number of rides and got to my car early afternoon. As soon as i started driving one of the brake seal cylinders let go and I had no brakes. I parked again and ran back to the last house in the valley and luckily managed to catch a ride back into town to a car parts place where I bought a replacement seal and fluid for the brake cylinder. I had to hitch back again and more running, to fix the brake. It doesn't matter that I damn well put the seals back in backwards the first time and the fluid all spat out when I bled them. Lucky I had enough fluid to do the job twice.So then I drove the hour and half or two hours back up the pelourus road end where my two dogs were still tied up land waiting, luckily quite OK. My retriever was OK after a while and we did more trips together, but not so much down big hills. He was getting old the time, but was still very keen and it just sort of suddenly happened with no warning. I felt terrible for putting him through this but I think you just do what you have to do to get your dog out as well as you can as you are the one that got him into this mess. The next day was Christmas day and we all slept through most of it.

**RESPONSE FROM RCCNZ** I emailed Rescue and Coordination Center New Zealand and this was their reply: > The distress beacon system and SAR generally in NZ exists to save human life. While we accept that many who are in the outdoors and marine environment love their pets, the national SAR exists for humans. It also does not include property such as vessels.

The more realistic question was for DOC "would DOC wave their heli landing restrictions for a commercial chopper operator on animal welfare grounds for an injured dog". That was always your only likely option - though good to have the PLB thing dismissed conclusively. The animal welfare act trumps quite a few other rules & bylaws. So I reckon you'd get permission for a chopper landing. But it would be good to know.

the rccnz response doesnt come out and say outright, we arent going to save pets if we know thats what the callout is for... it could be interpreted thats what they are saying.. people forget how expensive sar operations can be especially the helicopters for the short time they are in operation... should taxpayers pay for that? if sar came out and said we will rescue pets then they are opening themselves up to potentially increased strain on their resources then you'll get people, i'm not saying its what experienced trampers would do, but lesser experienced people may be worried because their dog is limping or tired and hit the beacon... as does happen with people calling for unecessary rescue some time. or if people loose their dog to they hit the beacon then and expect sar to go and find their dog? its open to abuse unfortunately. i'm reading more stories in the news that appear to be people hitting beacons when they don't need to.. i'd weigh up the risk of your dog getting injured on a given track and I wouldnt take the dog if i considered there was a reasonable chance of it happening unless i was prepared to go and get help myself and pay to get a chopper in if the dog couldnt be moved. i know people who have paid for their own rescue helicopter in full rather than summoning SAR if they can send someone to get help and the situation isnt life trheatening... they consider beacons only for life threatening situations end of story

"The animal welfare act trumps quite a few other rules & bylaws. So I reckon you'd get permission for a chopper landing. But it would be good to know." I think the only way to find the answer to that will be ask for forgiveness rather than permission. If you ask a chopper pilot and they say no what do you do next? You could be in trouble for abandoning an injured animal but the chopper pilot is only stating his understanding of where he is allowed to go. I know if I was on a jury trying to decide this point of law I would vote not guilty