Ruff paw-nishment: Helensburgh dog rescuer slammed with hefty fine from Wollongong Council

Helensburgh’s Julie-Ann Ehrlich has been rescuing abandoned dogs and puppies for more than two decades, but now local government red tape is making her tireless task harder than ever.

Dogs are supposed to be a man’s best friend, however, the distressing reality is every year thousands are put down in Australia because they don’t have a home.

Helensburgh‘s Julie-Ann Ehrlich is on a one-woman crusade trying to rescue dogs and puppies in regional NSW that are essentially on death row.

Ms Ehrlich has been rescuing four-legged friends from as far as Narrabri and Condobolin for more than 20 years and for the past six years she‘s run her charity organisation Country Companion Animal Rescue.

It’s a noble service which chucks up countless physical and emotional challenges, but now Ms Ehrlich has another hurdle to overcome in the form of a $3000 fine from Wollongong City Council.

Ms Ehrlich’s permit allows her to have six rescue dogs on her five-acre property at any one time, however, she concedes she has surpassed that total on occasion including when a council inspection officer attended in February.

The officer came a few weeks after Ms Ehrlich had rescued some dogs and puppies from out west and one was pregnant – little to her knowledge – and she ended up with a total of 15 puppies.

Ms Ehrlich, who has found a home for 13 of the 15 puppies, said she expected council would make some accommodations for puppies and not be told that it “wasn’t an ideal situation”.

Catahoula puppies Emmie and Exotic (four months old) at the Country Companion Animal Rescue in Helensburgh. Picture: Dylan Arvela

“A dog is a dog is a dog according to the council,” Ms Ehrlich told The Illawarra Star.

“The fact they would have died had I not taken them in is not taken into consideration.

“If you go to a pound and there’s seven dogs there, do I take six and say ‘I will save you and you can stay, you’re going to die’ or do you take all seven?”

Ms Ehrlich appealed the decision, however, it was upheld and she has until the middle of July to fork out the hefty penalty.

“It’s not a slap on the wrist,” she said.

“The $3000 has been raised from people in Helensburgh who support me. I’ve got the money, but why should the Rescue have to pay into government coffers for saving lives?

“There’s been no compassion whatsoever, no ‘silly girl Julie-Ann’ just a letter saying ‘we’ve considered appeal’.”

Ms Ehrlich explained that she‘s committed to finding a home for all the dogs she rescues once they’ve been microchipped, vaccinated and desexed.

However, since being handed the infringement notice, she hasn’t travelled over the mountain despite countless pleas from country animal shelters.

“If I have a dog or a cat that I’ve rescued it stays here until it gets a home,” Ms Ehrlich said.

“I had a dog here a couple of years ago who was here for over two years before he found a home and Wilbur, one of my dogs here, I’ve had since he was eight-months-old and he’s coming up to three now and I will keep him until he gets a home as well.

“I don’t have a big turnover of dogs.

“I haven‘t rescued for months. I get calls, emails, text messages every week, sometimes every day from country pounds that I’ve rescued from asking when I’ll be back because they can’t hold them any longer.”

Julie-Ann Ehrlich and Wilbur at the Country Companion Animal Rescue in Helensburgh. Picture: Dylan Arvela

Julie-Ann Ehrlich and her pet dog Sarge. Picture: Dylan Arvela

Ms Ehrlich also revealed her love for bigger “boofhead” dogs which she explained struggle to find people looking to adopt them.

“I have a tendency to rescue boofheads, I have a soft spot for boofheads,” she said.

“I will take the big dogs, boofhead type dogs – they are euthanized all the time in country pounds and it’s a matter of finding the right people who have a soft spot for boofheads.

“The number of people who ring me and say they would love a rescue dog, but say they want a cavoodle or a schnoodle or something like that is ridiculous because they don’t need rescuing – it’s the bigger dogs that need rescuing.”

Ms Ehrlich is hoping for a backflip from the council as she looks to work through an application which will allow her to have more dogs in her care.

“I am not trying to out rescue the RSPCA or anything,” Ms Ehrlich continued.

“I just want to have six to 10 dogs here that I can save because generally within a couple of weeks to a couple of months they get adopted.”

While local government red tape seems to have been wrapped around the Country Companion Animal Rescue, Ms Ehrlich does have the support of at least one Wollongong councillor in Helensburgh’s Cameron Walters.

“It’s really disappointing that leniency in the appeals process,” Cr Walters said.

“I’ll continue to push this further, but the administration seems set on dishing fines out rather than showing a little bit more compassion for someone who has shown great dedication to the community.”

Wollongong councillor Cameron Walters said he’s disappointed with the situation. Picture: Facebook

A spokesperson from Wollongong Council said they‘ve been working with Ms Ehrlich since January last year to “resolve an ongoing issue related to the number of animals housed” on the property.

“Council was alerted to the matter, following a number of noise complaints related to barking dogs,” the spokesperson said.

“Under the existing development consent, Ms Ehrlich is permitted to house six dogs in three boarding kennels at any one time at the Helensburgh property. The number of dogs living at the premises at the times Council has carried out inspections has consistently exceeded this number.

“Council has attempted to work with Ms Ehrlich and a notice, followed by an order, was issued in August 2021 asking her to comply with the existing development consent.

“Council has provided Ms Ehrlich a number of additional opportunities, including extensions of time, to comply with the order. A reinspection in February 2022 revealed the consent was still not being complied with and a fine was subsequently issued that month.”