From what I have seen in the videos, there was no apparent neglect. They spoke of illness, of hutchburn and piles of poop - I didn't see any of it. The judge ordered the return of the animals - they couldn't have been that bad off if the judge didn't see evidence of neglect.
What bothers me most? They came and took her animals. No warning, no previous attempts at contact, no investigation. Nope, one complaint, and BOOM, they're taking everything. To me, that's not fair, and that's not what humane societies are supposed to be about, nor is it how they present themselves.
Should they not have given her a chance to clean up? Should they not have said "these animals are sick, you must take them to the vet within __ days"? In my mind, this would be the correct procedure. They would work to affect change within the animal's current home, rather than seize, and rehome, all the while bemoaning the fact that there are all these unwanted animals... No, those animals weren't unwanted, their owner wanted them, but you didn't give them a chance.
Another little gem... Comments on some of the articles peg this as fundraising attempts, and it is plain to see that HSUS does stand to make money from this ordeal. They will receive donations for the care of these rabbits, even though the animals will be farmed out to rescue groups, who will not see a penny from HSUS. They are asking for restitution from the Rabbit Lady, regardless if her animals are returned or not... And to me, that's the kicker. HSUS takes the animals, refuses to return them when the judge orders it, and claims to have spent $80,000 taking care of these animals from November 16th to December 20th. A MONTH. Okay, yeah, there's a lot of rabbits - 192, I believe the reports say. But $80,000 taking care of them for a month?! They can't expect people to believe that each and every single one of those rabbits was sick. As well, if they took her animals, and refuse to give them back when the judge ordered it, they should be responsible for the care fees.
I guess the real problem is that regardless if the animals are ordered to be returned, regardless if the woman is convicted on animal neglect charges, the HSUS expects that she will pony up that $80,000+ to get her animals back. And if she doesn't, they'll go after her anyway. To me, this is how they're planning on putting breeders out of business. They take the animals, charge the boarding fees regardless if the seizure was warranted, and refuse to return the animals unless that money is handed over. If possible, they'll put a lien on the breeder's property, or garnish the breeder's wages, to get their money. They will try to make it impossible for the breeder to come out of it with enough money to return to operations.
Just another brick in the wall that will see pets as thing we tell our grandchildren about.
Research Links
First Article
Second Article
Third Article