However, I don't automatically judge them, or make assumptions. For me, one dog is enough. For these people, well, 61 dogs brightened their lives. The dogs appeared healthy, well fed and certainly cared for. In fact, several of the available articles state that the dogs are healthy and friendly and well cared for.
However, now the Animal Control has decided to push forward with charges, despite stating that the animals were healthy, friendly and cared for.
Animal Control seems surprised that these dogs, who may have been living in the same location their entire life, seem nervous and wary of strangers in the shelter. Really?! You mean dogs taken from their home environment, who left that environment in a fury of commotion, might be scared and nervous?! I never ever would have thought of that, they MUST have been abused, neglected, not socialized!! It couldn't be the affects of their home being on fire, of dozens of firefighters, animal service workers, volunteers, and a huge amount of commotion they're obviously not accustomed to...
They also state "almost every one of the shelties was tick-infested, matted and had flea infestations. None of them appeared to have been bathed or groomed regularly, if at all." Okay, so that... Not so cool. Nothing can really be said to defend this... However, what's tick-infested to them? To me, tick infested is hundreds of ticks - I once rescued a ferret(yes, it was actual rescue, someone set him free and I found him in the park), from whom I removed over 50 ticks. I stopped counting at 50. He was a white ferret, but appeared black from all the ticks. That, to me, is tick infested. What do they consider tick infested? Fifty? Twenty? Ten? One? Same goes for the fleas. Would my dog be considered flea infested because he has some? He's in between flea treatments, was just treated a day ago. Takes 3-5 days for the treatment to work. Am I abusing my dog because of it? And again, things can mean different things to different people. They were matted... how matted? They can't have been that matted, as the facebook post by the rescue group hoping to get some of these dogs states "they were able to save the coats on ALL BUT ONE sheltie!" So... they couldn't have been that matted!
"The main problems, beyond the fact that a number of these dogs are seniors with senior troubles, seem to be ear infections, skin conditions and very poor teeth. "
Ear infections. Skin conditions. Poor teeth.
Ear infections. Easily treated. I use an over the counter ear drop for any ear problems in myself or my pets - I did have my vet verify that the drops would be affective and suitable before using them the first time, though. There is no way to know if the owner was treating the ears at home, since it is a minor issue that is easily treated.
Skin conditions. A quick google search proves that shelties are a breed prone to having skin issues. Skin issues is a very broad statement that could cover a million different things. Are the dogs being fed a lower quality diet, resulting in dry, flakey skin? Are they suffering from mange? Are they suffering from one of the skin complaints more specific to Shelties? Was it dirt, did they just need a bath? Or maybe it was the affects of being involved in a HOUSE FIRE. Skin conditions are a very common complaint that can cover a huge range of issues, from the small and inconsequential to the kind where the animal might be better off dead. We don't know how bad it is because there is no photos showing how bad it was(or wasn't) and people are left to their own imagination to figure out how bad it really was.
Poor teeth. Well, they state early on that these are senior dogs with senior troubles. Poor teeth is very often a senior problem, but let's assume that they're not talking about the senior animals in the group with poor teeth.
This is one that really bothers me. Poor teeth. Do you know how much it costs to get a dental cleaning for an animal in your area? I know in mine, it is around $500. For the cleaning alone. Not including the drugs to put the animals under, the recovery time in the office, and any other little bits and bobbles they feel the animal needs. Add in those costs, and you're anywhere from $750 to $1000!! Many people cannot afford their own dental care, and now it is a requirement that you finance your pet's dental cleanings... how often? Annually? I don't think so. Yeah, I know that dental health is important, that teeth are important, but if it becomes abuse, cruelty or neglect to not have your pet's teeth cleaned regularly, then probably 95% of pet owners just became abusive, cruel or neglectful. It's not right, not at all.
So, based on dogs that are acting differently in a strange, confusing environment, that had at least one flea or tick on them, and at least one tangle in their hair, some of whom had ear infections, or skin conditions, or poor teeth, they are charging the woman with cruelty. They don't need this charge to get the animals removed from her, she signed them over.
Now, let's take a look at the dog owner.
"He could not provide the owner’s name, but public records show the Dennis family lives at the address where the fire occurred. Dog breeder websites indicate a business called Act 1 Shelties, run by a Ginny Dennis, is on the same street.
A 2002 Press-Enterprise story on the death of songwriter and entertainer Matt Dennis said he and his wife, Ginny, had moved to the Riverside area 18 years prior to give her more room to raise her championship Shetland sheepdogs."
A little further searching took me to Matt Dennis' IMDB page, which in turn took me to Virigina(Ginny) Maxey's IMDB page, which told me that Ms. Maxey was born September 4th, 1923. She's 90 years old. The animal control is dragging a 90 year old woman through court, through hell, because they want the publicity that they're doing good work, so the donations will roll into who? Them? The rescue involved? I don't know.
What I do know, is that this is undue stress on an elderly woman, who is already stressed because her home just burnt down, and she had to sign over her dogs to a rescue group. Who wants to bet that the stress of this will cause this poor woman's death, and that she'll never go to court over it?
What I think bothers me most, is that the dogs are being called rescues. I'm sorry, but while they were rescued from the fire(thanks to the hard working firefighters, I assume), they were not rescued from their owner. She signed them over, because she didn't have any place for them to go. She made the responsible call to relinquish ownership of the animals due to a tragedy that was unexpected and very unfortunate. To read some of the later articles, you could be led to believe that the animals were discovered thanks to the fire and saved from horrendous, neglectful, filthy conditions. No. She signed them over, they were not rescues, they were owner relinquished animals.
But that doesn't give the shocking headlines, does it? That doesn't bring in the donation money, the pity parties, the giant influx of adoption applications. They had a story, and what could have been an excellent story, but the animal control, the rescues, someone wanted to make this story bigger and badder.
Oh, and the icing on this cake? The dogs were signed over on the Saturday, but were ready to be adopted out on the Monday. Must have been in pretty rough shape...