Dog Owners in trouble - it could be you next
http://neveryetmelted.com/2009/08/05/spca-outrage-in-philadelphia I did not look for newpaper confirmation of the story, but it appears to be truthful. Anyone of us with at least one dog should be concerned about what is happening here. |
|
|
| Kristine sent it to me this morning - I hadn't heard anything earlier either about it. I sent it on to my basset and rescue friends.
It is pretty scary what power some groups are commanding, especially if this is truly an innocent owner situation. |
| the PA SPCA has posted an update claiming the dogs were:
1) in unsanitary conditions and 2) over the legal limit. I suspect unsanitary conditions is to give them some cover since that is sooooo subjective. |
| I just downloaded this from the PSPCA web site.
August 6, 2009 Murder Hollow Basset Hound Update In response to complaints, Pennsylvania SPCA officers visited the location of Murder Hollow Kennels and left requests to be contacted. There was no response to these requests. On a follow-up visit by a Pennsylvania SPCA officer and representatives from the Pennsylvania Department of Dog Law six days later, the owner was present but refused entry. Both Dog Law representatives and Pennsylvania SPCA officers returned later that evening with warrants to enter the property. The dogs were found to be in unsanitary conditions, and the number of dogs present exceeded the City of Philadelphia limit of 12 animals allowed on a property. In lieu of charges, Pennsylvania SPCA agents worked with the owner to reduce the number of dogs on the premises and allowed her time to clean and make improvements to the area in which the dogs were housed. The owner surrendered some of the dogs and is working to clean and improve the kennels prior to a follow-up inspection. The Pennsylvania SPCA is encouraged by her efforts in providing and maintaining a more sanitary setting as well as veterinary care for the dogs that remain. The dogs are safe in foster care with an independent, partner organization. We appreciate the outpouring of support for these dogs from the Bassett community. |
| Is she claiming that she didn't know there was a limited number of dogs that she could have on her property? Because if she did know, and those were the rules, I am inclined to side with authority on this one, complaints or sanitary conditions aside. Unless the rule was just instituted, Im not sure what valid reason there would be for defying it. Am I missing something? |
Someone complained about noise (gee - bassets, who would have thunk it?  ) PSPCA says they notified her but she failed to respond. When they returned she denied them entry without a warrant (which is what all serious dog people are being told to do, by the way - raids like these are becoming very common; some justified, some not). They returned with a search warrant (at which point she should have already removed most if not all of her dogs, but you didn't hear that from me - this is the advice we are being given and for good reason in some areas of the country, PA most certainly among them, Texas is even worse)
There used to be, apparently, a 26 dog limit (I don't know if there were contingencies involved - the pack had been there for 20 plus years). It was fairly recently changed to 12 - how recent, I don't know. Do you follow closely when your local ordinances change? You should be. Most states now have organizations founded and designed to protect dog owners' rights - find their website and sign up for their updates. In WI our local club is a member of the WI Dog Federation and we have two member delegates whose job it is to monitor these things and report back to our club members as well as see what we can do to help the fight. Anyway, once there, they discovered she was over her limit. SOP - can't say if it was followed in this case or not - is to threaten the person with hell and damnation (usually jail time and/or substantial fines) for real or imagined violations (and she was clearly over the limit) until they sign over all or some portion of their dogs, depending on the situation. You should always be polite and respectful, but never, ever sign your dogs over no matter what they threaten. Once you've done that, since you can't prove coercion, there really is no recourse. Your dogs are gone. One way to protect yourself, knowing that they'll be back, is to invite all of your best friends over as witnesses, cameras, video and still, in hand. They may get tossed out, but it's worth a try. If the situation was genuinely bad, then there's really no issue. It should be investigated and some or all dogs should be seized. Really, though, for this kind of violation it would make more sense to cite and give her X number of days to get her numbers down. In many cases what happens is that "trigger happy" AC's prefer to seize the dogs; then they realize they really don't have a good case - say like in this case, where people starting calling asking very pointed questions about what the heck they thought they were doing - and then you have to come up with a nice story, usually unsanitary conditions. Some times true, some times not. If someone walked in to my house right now they would see 1) Che, buzzed, but not in the final buzz so a little ragged yet and still dusty looking from last night's romp in the back 40. 2) Macy probably has a burr on her SOMEHWHERE, I removed about 15 of them last night, but she's a magnet and has some mats on her belly too. Abuse. 3) Sybil always looks like an unmade bed 4) Belle has some dirt on her muzzle and at 11 1/2 she's a bit stiff, so clearly in need of veterinary attention 5) Liz who is also carrying back 40 dust patina. 6) Mad who has residual neurological deficiency from her FCE 2 1/2 years ago and would probably be characterized as in dire need of medical attention despite about $10,000 worth of same the first 6 months after her injury, I stopped counting after that, but I still keep the invoices from her regular chiropractic visits as well as her regular vet bills and have the two vets who see her regularly on speed dial...
OK, I'm not quite that paranoid yet 
But things are getting very strange out there. It's hard to separate fact from fiction any more, but easy with the flurry of anti-pet laws that keep springing up to find yourself moved from a perfectly respectable dog owner to facing criminal liability in the stroke of a pen. As for this case, we'll have to see how it unfolds, but I doubt she has much recourse. I also doubt her dogs were abused or even neglected by hunting dog husbandry standards. I could be wrong, but given the PSPCAs godawful reputation I suspect even if their care was suboptimal they were probably better off where they were than subjected to that hell hole. Not being cute and little and fluffy I sort of doubt there was the usual profit motive though, and suspect Basset rescue will have the honors of disposing of the seized dogs. Cynical? Who? Me?
Kristine |
| Guess you called it, Kerry. This alert (below) came out yesterday from the Dog Federation of Wisconsin - the OES Club of SE Wisconsin is a member club.
HSUS usually cooks up some kind of bust right before a legislative push so we've been expecting it. But we usually don't get concrete warning of time frame or type of target . Must be scraping the bottom of the bad breeder barrel here in WI because their last big bust here was of a rescue/shelter
Kristine ------------- The following alert has just now been posted to the DFOW website: www.dfow.net BREEDERS RED ALERT AUGUST 18, 2009 URGENT * URGENT * URGENT * URGENT * URGENT * URGENT * URGENT * URGENT * DFOW has just been notified by a very credible source that between now and just after legislators go back into session floor periods (September 15, 2009), the Humane Society of the United States will be orchestrating a breeder bust. If you have been listed in a breeder directory, have shown your dogs or have advertised a litter in any publication in the last nine years—you must be on your guard at all times. Do not allow anyone into your home without a search warrant. In the State of Wisconsin, Animal Control officers and HSUS do not have police powers. They must be accompanied by law enforcement (although some law enforcement officers are also animal control officers) with a search warrant in order to enter your premises. If HSUS is working in conjunction with law enforcement and there is a search warrant, you must cooperate. DO NOT SIGN OVER ANY OF YOUR DOGS if threatened. Do not believe those that state that the charges against you will be lessened if you sign over your dogs. Video tape the entire proceedings. If you are detained asking questions while a search is going on, have another individual available to video tape or photograph the proceedings. Ask for proof of identification. Get names and license plate numbers for those coming onto your property. Some breeders have had to get special permits in order to have more than the arbitrary number of allowed animals in their community and have had to waive their constitutional rights in order to get those permits. If you are in this situation, you must contact a lawyer and find out what your rights are TODAY. If animal control or law enforcement come to your door, walk out of your door and shut it behind you. Do not allow them to enter your home—you go out to them unless they have a search warrant. Please read the article “What to do when animal control comes knocking” http://www.dpca.org/BreedEd/when_animal ... _comes.htm for more details. If anything seems amiss, make notes of dates and times, take names, get witness names, what they did, take photos, and keep a log of suspicious activities. We often hear fanciers state that “this issue will never affect me” when it comes to breeder licensing legislation. There have been at least 4 situations that have already happened in OUR STATE since the beginning of the year and breeder licensing requirements have not yet been passed into law. The orchestrated bust that we were warned about today could very well be targeted at any one of us. You must protect yourself against false accusations. This is a very serious situation. If you truly believe in preserving the future of your chosen breed or breeds, you must do everything in your power to protect those breeds and their heritage. Insist on the preservation of your constitutional rights. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Cross posting is allowed. Tracey Johnston DFOW Vice President |
Yeah the video camera is the all important tool (hey Sybil where is it?) from what I can see. It's what helped one breeder get back his dogs, (although it took 8 weeks to test them to see if they were aggressive  ). He is circulating the video as well to show how much worse of a condition they were in when they were returned than when they left. I have to remember where I saw that  |
| Were there ever any more details on the basset woman? |
| I read something the other day that was posted somewhere about how she can't comment on the charges and what is going on, I don't think I kept it though. THE PA SPCA says they have turned everything over to the States AG. |
ButtersStotch wrote: Were there ever any more details on the basset woman?
Yes, she did make a statement even though AC threatened her not to talk to the press Well, technically she didn't talk to the press, but directly to the dog community. I have a copy somewhere. I'll post it when I have time to dig it back up, though I'm sure it's hit a number of blogs by now so you can probably find it if you want to take the time.
Her case caught some influential attention and she does have a lawyer, so the rest remains to be seen. I imagine the neglect charges can be easily disputed, but the fact remains that she was over the limit, though she clearly didn't know it and no one offical bothered to tell her as she licenced her over the limit dogs year after year, rather they happily took her money for the dogs she apparently wasn't permitted to have (it-s called selective enforcement - evidently the limit was lowered further back than most were aware of - like I said, you have to watch your local ordinance changes like a hawk). One smells a rat, or rather an anti-hunting component to the equation. All of her neighbors have apparently come out in support of her so the anonymous noise complaint is interesting as well. Ultimately, though, her biggest, though understandable, downfall, was to sign over dogs. Even if you are over the limit in most jurisdictions they can't just sweep and seize X numbers of dogs, but must give you some amount of time to reduce numbers to get into compliance, which at a guess is why they came up with the "neglect" charge from the sound of it to justify their actions. Often they threaten to haul you off to jail if you don't sign dogs over. Rarely do they have the jurisdiction to do that, but they're not required to tell you that
Kristine |
| I guess I'm just wondering why they targeted her if there really were no other problems? It doesn't make sense that the HS would go out searching for more dogs to have homes for, you know? Unless it's just a power issue and they're bored? I think I probably can't process this because it doesn't make any kind of good sense. |
| I think th eissue is HSUS and PETA and the AR don't make sense to the normal pet owner, never mind those of us with our own packs.
This is their latest target - wonder how the majority of Americans will react to this. http://jacksonville.com/business/2009-08-19/story/jacksonville_billboard_slammed_as_cruel_and_ugly_to_obese |
| OK, found it. I think it was written the weekend of Aug 8/9th. At least that's when it hit the main dog law lists. There have been updates since then, but more limited in scope as it's heading towards litigation in all likelihood and it's my understanding NAIA is onboard.
Jill, it doesn't have to make sense. Seen singularly, many of these raids do not. It's when you look at the aggregate, which most of us don't see, you quickly begin to see a very disturbing pattern. Another unfortunate side effect is that there ARE cases of real abuse, real neglect. Issues that need to be addressed, animals that do need to be protected, and animal control officers who are genuinely the good guys and just doing their job. And then there's the "animal rights" movement and their most mainstream political arm: HSUS & their allies at the local and state levels. Jill, if you're really interested google English Setter breeder/exhibitor and founder of All Setter Rescue Bob Attleson and the city of Littleton, Colorado and read about his case from I think it was February '08. It was a wake-up call far beyond Colorado. Up until then rescue and show breeders alike had largely been in our own little world of "but we're the "good guys" - this can't happen to us!" Wrong. Anyway, Wendy's words below. Kristine ------------- Here is another side of the story from Wendy herself: Please cross post....... First a huge thank you for all your words of support and everything that you have done! I had my third visit today from the PSPCA and again threats of multiple citations if I didn't cooperate with these lovely folks. I can fill you in the details, but more important fish to fry (sorry, Jeep). I have been deluged by phone calls and e-mails from all over the country, from a lawyer in GA (" forget the SPCA, go directly to the State Attorney General") to the manager of a shelter in IL ("can't believe.. and horrified"). The blogs seem to have been in over drive. Good news is we got a very sympathetic article in one of the two major papers today. A reporter has also called from the Philadelphia Inquirer, as well as the AKC and the Chronicle of the Horse (Molly Sorgi? 804-994-2349). My problem is that if I respond personally, the SPCA has made it clear that I must "cooperate or multiple citations will be issued and there would be no PA Kennel License". So here is my response to the PSPCA website (www.pspca.org/news), first article about the Murder Hollow Bassets. I cannot respond to anyone in the media or even the PSPCA, but I can let you know. Whatever you chose to do with my information, oh well. 1. Only one dog barking complaint from unknown neighbor, no other complaints. That neighbor has yet to come forth, although all, I mean all have expressed dismay in writing. Never in the 22 years of having a kennel here has anyone come to me to complain in person, writing, or e-mail. 2. The websites indicated that the SPCA left requests to be contacted. The 'Humane Law Officer' (her term, not mine) left a card in my door with no information, no requests for a call, no warnings or no citations a few days before the raid. Absolutely none. She could have left a note to call, because I get lots of cards from grass cutters to painters. No mention of any 12 dog limit in the city. 3. Yes, I initially refused entry with a long explanation about abuses due to the new Dog Law. Two Dog Law Officers (from Harrisburg in two trucks), three PSPCA officers (in three trucks, not including the small truck with those tiny multiple pens on the side), and two Police Officers (two police cars) quickly returned with a search warrant. 4. The PSPCA did NOT work with the owner to reduce the number of dogs. Officer Tara Loller repeatedly, repeatedly threatened to take all the dogs if I did not give her 10. Under extreme duress and far outnumbered, I handed over 10 hounds. Talk about Sophie's Choice in the dark. Then they found Hansel and demanded one more. I gave them my other house hound, taking off her collar and Invisible Fence collar. All the time crying hysterically and protesting loudly. 5. When forced to sign release papers for the now 11 hounds, I explained that Betsy Park was the technical owner of three and wrote her name at the bottom of the forms. (Betsy, sending you copies.) Officer Loller assured me that Betsy Park would get first consideration for adoption. 6. A 'Warning' for re-inspection was issued, but no other warning or citation. A copy of the Philadelphia Animals laws (17 pages) included 3 lines which stated "No residential dwelling unit shall keep a total of more than twelve (12) adult dogs or cats combined of which no more than four (4) may be unneutered", was left in my kennels. These laws were never handed to me before or after the raid, and I was never informed of these laws by my Philadelphia Vet or the Philadelphia Dog Licensing Agency that took my money year after year. 7. At the first re-inspection, the 'Humane Law Officer' was accompanied by an Assistant District Attorney, Barbara Paul. They found the conditions of the hounds (one bitch needed nail trimming, all done by my Vet) and kennels to be satisfactory (some ceiling insulation tiles were more securely fastened). The indentations in the limestone screenings outside the kennel made by random scratching will be filled with more screenings. That should have been accomplished, but the black cloud over the kennel dropped 6+" of rain on Sunday. Tons of stone are being dumped on the lane first. 8. The DA left her card and asked to be phoned with questions. I e-mailed her a question about the definition of "residential dwelling unit". Is the barn a separate unit? As it was constructed and only used by hounds, does that make the barn a residential unit? She replied that she could not give me that information because we may be in "adversarial positions" and directed me to the Philadelphia Bar Lawyer Referrals. 9. To date, no one has been told of the location of the seized hounds and no calls have been returned from Officer Ray Little, the PSPCA Adoption Agent. A neighboring Vet who has offered free health care for the life of the adoptees and wants Khaki has not heard from them. David Gottier who wants the two litter mates of his hounds and Sandy McKenna who wants the one year old fuzzy bitch have been stone walled. Dr. Roy Feldman and Pat Renner from my Hunt have not heard back. But there is an urgent message on the PSPCA website asking for foster homes and adoptions, because they have no room in the shelter. Again, I am asking you to be in the position of the messenger, but feel free to ask me any questions. Thank you SO much. Wendy |
kerry wrote: Yeah the video camera is the all important tool (hey Sybil where is it?) from what I can see. It's what helped one breeder get back his dogs, (although it took 8 weeks to test them to see if they were aggressive
). He is circulating the video as well to show how much worse of a condition they were in when they were returned than when they left. I have to remember where I saw that Yes, I read about that case too. The dogs, and his kids, will probably never be the same, but he was one of the rare lucky ones who got the dogs back alive in that situation. Funny you should mention the camera. I just found my video camera the other day. I had so effectively hidden from the shark, eh, I mean Sybil, that I couldn't remember where I put it (we really need a "duh!"/slapping head emoticon ) I want to use it to tape my and Chris' herding sessions, but though I think my risk is relatively low in the grand scheme of things, probably stupid not to have it charged up and with a fresh tape at all times.
By the way, her newest claim to goatlike fame: she ate a 4 oz bottle of clipper blade lubricant. I mentioned it to my vet when I happened to see her later in the day and she didn't even bat an eye.
Kristine |
| Wow... just... wow... |
Didn't find exactly what you're looking for? Search again here:
Custom Search
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|