The Sheltie went home! (rescue v. owner saga)

[HenryisBlaisin]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8243828]
A reason many people go to rescues to adopt instead of a shelter is the people can’t stand the thought of going to a shelter, picking one dog out of the hundreds and leaving the rest behind, knowing some of those left behind will be euthanized.

At a rescue they can pick out one dog and not feel they denied a chance of life by picking the one they did instead of the one with sad eyes in the neighboring cage. That is the very reason I adopt from rescues (both rescues I adopted from take on dogs from high kill shelters to give them a better chance at finding homes.)[/QUOTE]

I’m the exact opposite…I go to the shelter because the dogs in the rescue are already safe. The ones in the shelter are not. Yes, it’s sad to leave so many behind…but if I go adopt one, that’s one less.

I see a couple of problems here. One, the shelter should never have released that dog without checking for a microchip (apparently the excuse was they couldn’t find a vet on a holiday weekend…so wait a day and scan the dog!). A dog that was obviously not the run-of-the-mill stray is a prime candidate to have one. Heck, my mutt from the shelter has one–I would be LIVID if I found out he was picked up and not scanned! Three days seems a bit short anyway…maybe three BUSINESS days, but three days where they were likely closed for the majority of the time and not answering phones? That’s not right.

Two, the rescue acted extremely irresponsibly by not returning the dog to the owner once there was proof of ownership. Whether they agree with the dog’s lifestyle or not, it was not abused or neglected, and it was NOT THEIR DOG.

The weak excuse for not scanning the dog coupled with the wacko rescue owner makes me think there was some kind of “deal” with the shelter to sneak dogs of her breed to her before they could be claimed by someone else. That’s also kind of shady, IMO. I hate when shelters won’t adopt out certain dogs because a breed rescue has “dibs.” If a person shows up before the rescues does and wants to give the dog a home, they should be able to. Why prolong that for the dog when going to foster homes and then finally an adopter (which can take months as many rescues are so picayune about who can adopt and if you don’t have an oblong yard with exactly 5 garden gnomes, a green fence with purple polka-dots, and a unicorn wind chime hanging from a pear tree, well, then the dog will wait some more) when they can have a good home today? It makes little sense and makes me wonder if there are hefty “donations” involved that would not otherwise be made.

[Beckham03]

I live in this area and have several dogs from the pound in question. It is well funded and reaches out to many groups to get dogs into proper groups, especially if their is a physical or mental issue that can be handled better elsewhere. They also worked their butts off this Fourth of July with new methods of getting those scared loose dogs home sooner.

Being a tech, and choosing to adopt, I deal a lot with local rescues…and have had nothing but positive experiences. Done some volunteering myself, and met some really awesome people.

This is why I can’t wrap my head around this case at all. I have been following it all along and just have no idea why they wouldn’t return the dog.

[Alagirl]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8243708]
This post focused on how crazy the rescue acted with owner. BUT if fails to analyze the positive role the rule the rescue played. The dog after getting lost was picked up, taken to a public shelter. Many public shelters if dog is not claimed/adopted in a short window of time euthanize adult dogs.

Even though the rescue owner acted crazy about giving him back, they were there to take in the dog and as a breed specific rescue were a place the owner could locate the dog.

The fact that later the rescue person acted crazy is unfortunate, but overall the dog was saved by the rescue and able to be located there. The actions of the rescue director were extreme of course. But without the rescue the dog might not be alive…county shelters can euthanize within a week or less if over crowded.[/QUOTE]

How in the world…

How can you find any way to apologize the rescue’s actions?

How can you find grounds in this case to question the breeder’s motive.

‘even though the rescue owner acted crazy’

Apologist for the crazy…the rescue owner should be on the hook for the dog owner’s legal bills!
There, you have a dog owner who has the animal chipped to prove ownership, goes after the lost dog right away AND pays a fortune t get the dog back, and you STILL find reasons to look down on them and carry the flag of the crazies!

you are too much.

[Lauruffian]

Good night, the owner amassed over $100,000 in legal fees. I hope there is some way she can recover that.

[LauraKY]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8243708]
This post focused on how crazy the rescue acted with owner. BUT if fails to analyze the positive role the rule the rescue played. The dog after getting lost was picked up, taken to a public shelter. Many public shelters if dog is not claimed/adopted in a short window of time euthanize adult dogs.

Even though the rescue owner acted crazy about giving him back, they were there to take in the dog and as a breed specific rescue were a place the owner could locate the dog.

The fact that later the rescue person acted crazy is unfortunate, but overall the dog was saved by the rescue and able to be located there. The actions of the rescue director were extreme of course. But without the rescue the dog might not be alive…county shelters can euthanize within a week or less if over crowded.[/QUOTE]

Sorry Countrywood, you’re wrong on this one. Very wrong. The national Sheltie organization disowned this nutbar months ago. The shelter was wrong to not release the dog without scanning for the chip, the rescue is nuts for not releasing the dog to its rightful owner. This is the kind of crazy crap that gives rescues a bad name. But of course, just like the other crazy nutbar rescues and sanctuaries (think Mill Creek or Olympic Animal Sanctury or Caboodle Ranch) other nutbars will defend them. ETA: I’m not calling you a nutbar, but you’re wrong.

[Countrywood]

I am not apologizing for the rescue director or excusing her actions. I agreed they are crazy. Was trying to point out that rescues play a positive role and that this nut case in her own way did some good ( but then of course got into a legal battle which was senseless)

. Everyone (including me, in case there ia doubt) agree the rescue was nuts. And shelter to blame as well. Being that it is an extreme case and most rescues dont’ ever in their entire tenure ever get involved in anything like this, why post it…to fan the anti rescue flames? Whatever, some good posts were made on this thread.

[Mosey_2003]

Can’t we ever just call out someone being a nutso without the troupe of explanations of how not all people like that person is nuts? Yeah, we know. We’re talking about this nutso right now, and she’s nuts.

[Alagirl]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8244024]
I am not apologizing for the rescue director or excusing her actions. I agreed they are crazy. Was trying to point out that rescues play a positive role and that this nut case in her own way did some good ( but then of course got into a legal battle which was senseless)

. Everyone (including me, in case there ia doubt) agree the rescue was nuts. And shelter to blame as well. Being that it is an extreme case and most rescues dont’ ever in their entire tenure ever get involved in anything like this, why post it…to fan the anti rescue flames? Whatever, some good posts were made on this thread.[/QUOTE]

This post focused on how crazy the rescue acted with owner. BUT if fails to analyze the positive role the rule the rescue played. The dog after getting lost was picked up, taken to a public shelter. Many public shelters if dog is not claimed/adopted in a short window of time euthanize adult dogs.

And that is after you edited your first apologist post!

What is the positive in this?!
he pound and the rescue kept the dog from it’s owner for FIFTEEN MONTH!
the owner had legal fees of over ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS!!!
that’s twice a year’s income for most folks! That is more than the cost of a house!

Where, I pray, do tell, is there anything positive?
That the dog didn’t get his by a car?
That they didn’t euth him right away?

Kind of funny…around here I had to take a critter to the pound to check it for a chip, because the vet didn’t own a scanner… this pound does not own that gadget? But the rescue does?!

ETA, it wasn’t mentioned, but I am amazed that they didn’t have the dog snipped, in all that spitefulness!

[Paks]

This is a statement issued by the rescue’s lawyer last year when this first started. http://www.centralohiosheltierescue.org/resources/PS+whole.png

Seems a bit contrived to me.

[LauraKY]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8244024]
I am not apologizing for the rescue director or excusing her actions. I agreed they are crazy. Was trying to point out that rescues play a positive role and that this nut case in her own way did some good ( but then of course got into a legal battle which was senseless)

. Everyone (including me, in case there ia doubt) agree the rescue was nuts. And shelter to blame as well. Being that it is an extreme case and most rescues dont’ ever in their entire tenure ever get involved in anything like this, why post it…to fan the anti rescue flames? Whatever, some good posts were made on this thread.[/QUOTE]

She didn’t do any good. If the shelter had scanned the chip, the dog would have been returned to the owner. There was NO need for the rescue. The rescue should have scanned for the chip and returned the dog to its owner. They’re both very, very wrong.

Every dog I’ve ever pulled from a shelter gets scanned at the shelter and again at the vets to make sure there’s not an owner out there looking for him/her.

[Horsegal984]

I thought the shelter scanned the dog, but it was only traced back to a vet clinic that was closed for the holiday weekend? Maybe I misunderstood because that’s so often what happens around here, vet implants the chip, owner never updates info so we can only trace to vet and hope their records tell us who the owner is.

This case is insane, and I too hope the owner can recoup her legal fees. I cannot for the lifeof me understand the rescue’s POV, even as a fellow rescuer. If we pulled a dog from a shelter and the owner showed up the next day we would be thrilled to hand over the pup, owner obviously loves and cares for dog, and it frees up that spot for another Foster without a loving owner. Absolutely rediculous! I mentioned this case to our Foster coordinator when the judge gave the dog back and the first thing she said was “OMG they still haven’t given that poor dog back? WTF??” And that’s why I work with the group I do, they’re not crazy! :lol:

[rugbygirl]

This is insane. I can’t believe that the courts end up backlogged with this type of garbage, and am saddened that despite proof of ownership, the rescuer STILL needed a judge to order her to give the dog back.

[khall]

Why did the original AC shelter not scan the dog for a microchip? That should be the first thing done with a dog that comes in.

[LauraKY]

[QUOTE=khall;8244301]
Why did the original AC shelter not scan the dog for a microchip? That should be the first thing done with a dog that comes in.[/QUOTE]

They did, but the owner hadn’t registered the chip. It still tracks back to the vet that inserted it, but the vet was closed over the weekend. Instead of holding the dog and waiting until they could check with the vet, the shelter released the dog to the rescue.

A couple of years ago, my neighbors moved to El Paso with their two dogs.A couple of weeks later, my vet called me to tell me that El Paso animal control had called and their dogs were in the shelter, but they hadn’t registered the chip. Luckily I had their number and they were thrilled to find their dogs (and they registered them ASAP).

It’s a good idea to periodically have your animals scanned when you’re in for a vet visit, sometimes the chips shift and are hard to find and don’t scan properly.

[vacation1]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8244024]
Being that it is an extreme case and most rescues dont’ ever in their entire tenure ever get involved in anything like this, why post it…to fan the anti rescue flames? Whatever, some good posts were made on this thread.[/QUOTE]

I posted it mostly because I was so tickled that Piper is going home (for now and, probably, forever) and that the judge was so sublimely dismissive of the rescue woman, who richly, richly deserved to be dismissed without a hearing after TORTURING that owner for over a year with endless manipulations and more stories than the Arabian Nights. I am not bashing rescue, all my pets have been ‘rescues’ from shelters. Talking about this stuff isn’t de facto bashing, although I know it can feel like it when you’re involved in the community whose bad actor is discussed, and you’re already upset about what happened.

[vacation1]

[QUOTE=Countrywood;8244024]
Being that it is an extreme case and most rescues dont’ ever in their entire tenure ever get involved in anything like this, why post it…to fan the anti rescue flames? Whatever, some good posts were made on this thread.[/QUOTE]

I posted it mostly because I was so tickled that Piper is going home (for now and, probably, forever) and that the judge was so sublimely dismissive of the rescue woman, who richly, richly deserved to be dismissed without a hearing after TORTURING that owner for over a year with endless manipulations and more stories than the Arabian Nights. I am not bashing rescue, all my pets have been ‘rescues’ from shelters. Talking about this stuff isn’t de facto bashing, although I know it can feel like it when you’re involved in the community whose bad actor is discussed, and you’re already upset about what happened.

[Horsegal984]

[QUOTE=LauraKY;8244538]
They did, but the owner hadn’t registered the chip. It still tracks back to the vet that inserted it, but the vet was closed over the weekend. Instead of holding the dog and waiting until they could check with the vet, the shelter released the dog to the rescue.

A couple of years ago, my neighbors moved to El Paso with their two dogs.A couple of weeks later, my vet called me to tell me that El Paso animal control had called and their dogs were in the shelter, but they hadn’t registered the chip. Luckily I had their number and they were thrilled to find their dogs (and they registered them ASAP).

It’s a good idea to periodically have your animals scanned when you’re in for a vet visit, sometimes the chips shift and are hard to find and don’t scan properly.[/QUOTE]

Ok, so I’m not misunderstanding things.

This actually happens frequently, that chips can only be traced to who they were sold to, unless the owner has registered them. So, one positive that can come out of this insanity is to remind people to register and keep their microchip information up to date!! Most companies now you can list several phone number and even an email, no reason to make it hard for people to get your pets back to you.

If this dog was hurt and brought into the ER it can drastically change the amount of time as well as the level of care that a hurt pup would get. An microchip that can’t be traced is one step above a stray, and would get basic stabilization. That means if it has fractures etc those won’t be addressed until an owner is located. No exploratory surgery or major work ups for internal bleeding or injuries until we talk to an owner. So update those chips! It’s worth the $15 for the peace of mind!

[LauraKY]

[QUOTE=vacation1;8244619]
I posted it mostly because I was so tickled that Piper is going home (for now and, probably, forever) and that the judge was so sublimely dismissive of the rescue woman, who richly, richly deserved to be dismissed without a hearing after TORTURING that owner for over a year with endless manipulations and more stories than the Arabian Nights. I am not bashing rescue, all my pets have been ‘rescues’ from shelters. Talking about this stuff isn’t de facto bashing, although I know it can feel like it when you’re involved in the community whose bad actor is discussed, and you’re already upset about what happened.[/QUOTE]

I’ve been following it because I work with collie and sheltie rescues. It’s only when some posters go off on a “all rescues are bad” vent that it becomes destructive. You know it’s funny, when the various Mill Creek threads were up, I don’t remember anyone claiming that all horse rescues are bad…why is that? Horse rescues have had their share of bad actors too.

[Alagirl]

[QUOTE=LauraKY;8244915]
I’ve been following it because I work with collie and sheltie rescues. It’s only when some posters go off on a “all rescues are bad” vent that it becomes destructive. You know it’s funny, when the various Mill Creek threads were up, I don’t remember anyone claiming that all horse rescues are bad…why is that? Horse rescues have had their share of bad actors too.[/QUOTE]

Maybe because it is still more common place to buy horses than to ‘adopt’ them, and there are really only a very few people out - relative to dog rescues - who go that route.

but we do have established, that every bad rescue - even for horses - makes it harder for the good guys to do their work. But it seems that the really bad ones are the known bat handlers in the realm, who, by some miracle, seem to never go away. Ceilia comes to mind…like a case of STD…

But dogs? a lot more of them out there…rescues as well, I think that increases the odds exponentially to come across a flaming nutbar.

But what I don’t see is that I don’t see many apologists for bad horse rescues as I do for the dog ones gone bad. There is no sense that that is ‘normal’.

[LauraKY]

[QUOTE=Alagirl;8244968]
Maybe because it is still more common place to buy horses than to ‘adopt’ them, and there are really only a very few people out - relative to dog rescues - who go that route.

but we do have established, that every bad rescue - even for horses - makes it harder for the good guys to do their work. But it seems that the really bad ones are the known bat handlers in the realm, who, by some miracle, seem to never go away. Ceilia comes to mind…like a case of STD…

But dogs? a lot more of them out there…rescues as well, I think that increases the odds exponentially to come across a flaming nutbar.

But what I don’t see is that I don’t see many apologists for bad horse rescues as I do for the dog ones gone bad. There is no sense that that is ‘normal’.[/QUOTE]

I used to think horse people were nuts until I got involved with dog people…so you’re right there.