# 28 goldens removed from Millis, MA breeder



## Julie Timmons (Dec 16, 2016)

I'm not sure who this breeder is but all 28 dogs/puppies were just brought to a non-golden rescue near me yesterday. Apparently the town animal control officer has been trying to shut this breeder down for 17 years?! Lots of inbreeding related health issues.

I'm still trying to find out more about it, the dogs were kenneled prior to arrival for 2 weeks so they could be monitored and cleaned up as they were in pretty bad shape. None are up for adoption yet. I searched for a golden breeder in Millis MA and only got a couple of hits and the top hit's name has appeared as a reputable breeder in these forums so I'm not sure it's the correct one. 

here is a link to the new coverage of their arrival at the rescue. https://boston.cbslocal.com/2019/05...wUiAO0V5HlTFc6bznH8cSYbJgNw2UPT4O7ThfRICuiP3A

There has been a lot of interest in the dogs on facebook so I'm sure they will get adopted quickly, but I only hope they don't end up back in rescues due to new owner's not understanding the risks involved with their unsocialized behaviors and/or health issues that can't be seen by the eye. This video shows the happy dogs, there is another facebook video on the rescue page showing the scared pups getting unloaded from the intake van. Made me want to take them all home!


----------



## Brinkleythegolden (Jun 18, 2012)

Oh my gosh-poor babies! At least they're safe now!


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

So.... they were found in deplorable conditions? But there is nothing else said about what exactly that means. 

It is not abusive to breed dogs.

It is not abusive to inbreed dogs (it's ethically wrong, but not abusive to the dogs).

A dog that lives 8 years and dies from cancer is not the fault of the breeder. 

Not doing clearances on your dogs or breeding without them is not ethical, but come on. These breeders will go away if people stop buying dogs from them. That's all. 

You do not ADOPT from breeders. You are BUYING dogs. Can people get their terminology correct????! 

Doing a search... I come up with the attached (last 2-3 pages) with a golden breeder in that area having problems a couple years ago..... speculating only that this is the same breeder. 

http://www.millis.org/pages/MillisMA_BOSMin/2017/09-25-17.pdf


----------



## Julie Timmons (Dec 16, 2016)

Megora said:


> So.... they were found in deplorable conditions? But there is nothing else said about what exactly that means.
> 
> It is not abusive to breed dogs.
> 
> ...


Not sure why you are arguing about abuse being tossed around as I never said that. But I would argue that having never been socialized and living in deplorable conditions resulting in being covered in feces and mats would be considered abusive. 

Maybe the reporter doesn't use the correct terminology, not being an expert in the field, but I don't think that was the point of the news piece. I do think that they could have done a better job of explaining what makes a good breeder vs a bad one. Like the importance of health clearances because let's face it, the majority of people looking for a pet do not know about it either.


----------



## Prism Goldens (May 27, 2011)

I read all the FB stuff on this, and what my personal takeaway was is that about half the dogs did appear to be ungroomed, etc...and the reports were unsocialized, but that this group who does not have a facility was given them to assess and place, when Yankee is RIGHT THERE is bothersome to me... more than the whole rest of the story. Yankee should have been given that job. This group is now majorly fundraising, and will get wealthy off these dogs, when Yankee is an old very established group that by all rights should have been assigned the job.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Julie - no comments were aimed at you. It was literally just me thinking aloud as I read a very vague article. 

It would have been better if the writer had simply explained the dogs were kept outside nonstop, were kept likely in situations where neighbors or others were teasing the dogs (which I inferred from reading the legal thingy), the owner was faking rabies certs and probably not getting the dogs adequate veterinary care, as well as being covered in feces and mats. 

My comment was reading the article - you would assume that the points I listed were the grounds for removing the dogs. I could stop my eyes from rolling about the comments from the owner who purchased TWO DOGS from the breeder. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...

My bigger concern is that in the past there have been been cases of dogs being confiscated from breeders - on vague grounds of abuse by the breeders which those breeders need to fight it out in court. It happens. One with GSD's lasted years and I believe litters of puppies were dying in the shelter + dogs were breeding/allowed to breed during that time as well. So people have to keep their guarded cynical hats on.


----------



## Julie Timmons (Dec 16, 2016)

Megora said:


> http://www.millis.org/pages/MillisMA_BOSMin/2017/09-25-17.pdf


That sounds like it could be the right person, I googled her name and she started a Go Fund me in Feb to raise funds for her legal defense and to pay for boarding her dogs.


----------



## Peri29 (Aug 5, 2017)

Prism Goldens said:


> I read all the FB stuff on this, and what my personal takeaway was is that about half the dogs did appear to be ungroomed, etc...and the reports were unsocialized, but that this group who does not have a facility was given them to assess and place, when Yankee is RIGHT THERE is bothersome to me... more than the whole rest of the story. Yankee should have been given that job. This group is now majorly fundraising, and will get wealthy off these dogs, when Yankee is an old very established group that by all rights should have been assigned the job.


You are very right about that. But appearantly the problem is also the space. YGRR has a quarantine place for limited number of dogs . And imagine the GRs arriving from Egypt & Turkey in addition to the other dogs they rescue. I believe after the first health checks are done, partial of the dogs will be distributed among various rescue groups. If one of the dog there has Giardia, it can affect the GRs on the Yankee's facility.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

The Goldens should have gone to Yankee Rescue. Agree with Prism. They have a huge endowment, and somehow decided to use it to brings a bazillion goldens from China. I am puzzled by the situation after doing some research. The couple seemed to title their dogs and breed responsibly for a good while. I wonder what happened along the way to make them do things less and less responsibly? It is a huge media circus. The dogs look okay, but yes scared and not socialized. I am 95 percent sure I know which breeder- is it okay to write the name? 




Prism Goldens said:


> I read all the FB stuff on this, and what my personal takeaway was is that about half the dogs did appear to be ungroomed, etc...and the reports were unsocialized, but that this group who does not have a facility was given them to assess and place, when Yankee is RIGHT THERE is bothersome to me... more than the whole rest of the story. Yankee should have been given that job. This group is now majorly fundraising, and will get wealthy off these dogs, when Yankee is an old very established group that by all rights should have been assigned the job.


----------



## LynnC (Nov 14, 2015)

Ljilly28 said:


> I am 95 percent sure I know which breeder- is it okay to write the name?


It is not against the GRF rules to post the breeder. It is also OK to post a breeder link as long as it DOES NOT have available pups listed on their website.


----------



## CAROLINA MOM (May 12, 2009)

This story names the Breeder in the Video-

https://whdh.com/news/28-golden-retrievers-rescued-in-animal-cruelty-case-arrive-at-mass-shelter/

GROVELAND, MASS. (WHDH) - More than two dozen golden retrievers that were rescued in Millis following a lengthy animal cruelty investigation arrived this week at the Sweet Paws Rescue shelter.



> Sweet Paws Rescue said in a Facebook post that a Massachusetts breeder who is facing four counts of felony animal cruelty in a separate case was ordered to surrender 28 golden retrievers. Dozens of more cruelty charges are pending.
> 
> Because the incident is ongoing, the rescue said it was unable to share specific details on the nature of the cruelty case, but a spokesperson for the Norfolk District Attorney’s Office says an investigation was launched in February after a woman brought a dead animal to Tufts Veterinary Emergency Treatment and Specialties in Walpole.
> 
> ...


There is more info on the Sweet Paws Rescue FB page-the Rescue is no longer taking Adoption Applications, they have been overwhelmed with applications. 


https://www.facebook.com/sweetpawsrescue/




> > ? 28 GOLDEN RETRIEVERS ARRIVING TOMORROW FROM MASSACHUSETTS CRUELTY CASE ?
> >
> > update - At request of ATTY, arrival moved to WEDNESDAY
> >
> > ...


----------



## OscarsDad (Dec 20, 2017)

If the shelter is turning to the public for help in caring for the dogs and for funding, I hope they have also reached out to YGRR who, as others have noted, have the resources to at least take some of the dogs and certainly the interest to do so.


----------



## Prism Goldens (May 27, 2011)

The Sweet PAws leader stated on her FB that Yankee wasn't notified, since her organization had the info that 'caught' the bad breeder. She also stated she hates breeders and had it in for this woman. I dk her- dk if she is good or bad or indifferent, just know that skipping Yankee for an unknown prior, about to be wealthy rescue is a hinky thing.


----------



## Julie Timmons (Dec 16, 2016)

This rescue is local to
me and does a great job with ALL their dogs and I am also familiar with the vet they are getting the goldens vetted by. Im not in agreement that they are trying to get rich off fundraising efforts. I am not sure what more a golden rescue would do for these pups over Sweet Paws. Someone clue me in?

Im copying their latest fb post with an update on the goldens. 

————

 UPDATE ON GOLDEN RETRIEVER DONATIONS 

To those naysayers that continually spam our page - we are an honest and grassroots organization that is in the trenches of rescue DAILY due to irresponsibility and stupidity of others. We don't have room on this page for yours too. If you did your research, you'd know that our veterinary bill for 2018 was over 400k. Our adoption fees do not cover the vetting expenses of our animals. Nor do we have an endowment or paid staff. If you did your research, you'd also know that our rescue has no investigative powers, didn't "confiscate or steal" these animals, these dogs were signed over to us by the governing agency and overseen by a MA Superior Court. (updates on puppies and adults at bottom of post) 

We are in the process of setting up a restricted fund that will support current and future medical needs of these Golden Retrievers to the extent that this fund will allow. We also realize there may be issues that could manifest after adoption. To date, all GR's have received age appropriate vaccinations and preventatives, dewormed, and spay & neuters are ongoing and those are sponsored by Riverside Veterinary Clinic. 

To DONATE TO THIS FUND, please indicate in notes at check out: https://www.sweetpawsrescue.org/donate

PUPPIES - we have a puppy with 3 (almost) closed valves in his heart that will need heart surgery. Most of the puppies had an intestinal virus that erupted shortly after arrival with one that ended up in the ER, another that spent the day at the vet, and several others that were able to ride it out with their foster homes under very close eye. 

ADULTS - we also have an adult with a heart murmur. We are providing behavioral evaluations for the adult GR's by a behaviorist. And we are still determining what ophthalmology services may be needed. One of the spay surgeries on a adult female revealed a mass with her uterus filled with puss which "was caught JUST in time".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

I thought fundraising was not permitted on the forum.



I think it's fair to question the motives of the rescue based on the comments of the person running it. 

We have other things happen to breeders. A/R people out there are going around and targeting different breeders and trying to put them out of business - that's whether these are good breeders or not and the accusations can be proven false. A good example recently was a cocker spaniel breeder and exhibitor who had all her dogs confiscated with claims of neglect and being kept in filthy conditions. She just got her dogs back.


----------



## Prism Goldens (May 27, 2011)

Megora said:


> I thought fundraising was not permitted on the forum.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And the FB posts by the leader of this group absolutely appear to be a targeting of this breeder by her group. And a deliberate overlooking of the Yankee group which should have been the one to get these dogs, without question, imo. I do not know this breeder and have never researched her program, fwiw. It's not that I am 'for' the breeder, I do not have an opinion but do know that the MO used here is not unlike that used on the Cocker breeder who did not deserve her life being ruined by an overzealous AR person.


----------



## CAROLINA MOM (May 12, 2009)

> I thought fundraising was not permitted on the forum.


14. GoldenRetrieverForum.com Members are prohibited in posting threads that may be seeking donations for themselves, other individuals, or web sites (other than non-profits).If members wishes to take on such endeavors this must be done in PM’s or on another site, but not posted on the open forum of GRF. *Thread/posts for donation requests that are going directly to a charitable organization can be posted on GRF. *Threads/ posts of those that contain other websites that request for solicitation/donations are at the discretion, upon review, for removal by GRF Forum Management Team and/or the VerticalScope Inc.

Sweet Paws Rescue-About us-

https://www.sweetpawsrescue.org/about-us

Our Mission
*Sweet Paws Rescue (SPR) is a registered non-profit animal rescue based in Massachusetts*. We are a grassroots, boots-on-the-ground, shelterless, foster-based and volunteer-powered organization.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Prism Goldens said:


> And the FB posts by the leader of this group absolutely appear to be a targeting of this breeder by her group. And a deliberate overlooking of the Yankee group which should have been the one to get these dogs, without question, imo. I do not know this breeder and have never researched her program, fwiw. It's not that I am 'for' the breeder, I do not have an opinion but do know that the MO used here is not unlike that used on the Cocker breeder who did not deserve her life being ruined by an overzealous AR person.


I agree. 

I don't know who this breeder is! But looking at the dogs there - I'm shocked that these dogs were confiscated by animal control and handed over to a small rescue headed by somebody who was chomping at the bit to get her hands on these dogs. 

The equivalent that I know of - she had time to place most if not all her dogs before being pushed out of business. 

And don't forget there are some "rescues" which profit off the dogs they take in. Or the very least, she's fundraising off these dogs vs placing them in permanent homes - particularly since they are all "adopted" already.


----------



## Swampcollie (Sep 6, 2007)

This is an organization that clearly was not prepared to take on the responsibility of 28 Golden Retrievers. They lack the facilities, knowledge, experience and financial resources necessary for the task. The organization should have had these things in place PRIOR to undertaking the task. The fact that they didn't speaks a great deal about them. 

There are other breed specific rescues in the region that do possess the resources and networks to undertake such a task. 


Courts have been known on occasion to do some very foolish things.


----------



## GoldenGals (May 8, 2019)

Ive been a lurker here for a while but I feel like I have to respond to this one. I’m not sure why you think that Sweet Paws isn’t prepared for these dogs and YGRR is? They are in my area and in full disclosure I have fostered from them twice before my girl got too old and follow them on FB. I really would do some research before knocking them. The dogs were placed with SPR because the town and ACO wanted that. SPR does have a facility they use when the dogs come up from the south but they are a foster based rescue so after assessment the dogs are all placed in homes. It isn’t because they can’t have them there it’s because the goal is to help the dogs learn how to live in a home and better evaluate and place them. I’m pretty sure we all agree a home is better than a shelter ? YGRR rescued 117 dogs last year. SPR rescued 1,600. I’ve no doubt they know what they are doing. They are a volunteer rescue - they rescued 1,600 dogs with volunteers caring for those dogs and doing all the marketing, management, fundraising. All the money goes back to saving dogs and cats !! . YGRR has an endowment and multiple paid staff members. I get that they are Goldens but I wouldn’t say this group is not going to do right by these dogs just because they aren’t Golden specific. They get transports bigger than that every month. And they rescue from rural areas with no options and no ACO and few if any shelters - their volunteers are literally picking up boxes of puppies dumped on the side of the road. And they don’t discriminate on how old or hurt or sick an animal is. If it ends up on their doorstep they take it. And they take surrenders from places like the Lawrence pound. So as much as it stings that they lump all breeders together you have to look at the good they do. You can’t knock that they are doing the right thing and it’s pretty admirable to me that they are able to do that with all volunteers. So all that get rich money is going to save a whole bunch more animals - and they still won’t come near to fundraising what YGRR


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

But in this case they were given first dibs on handling this case over golden retriever rescues. And from the sounds of it - through underhanded means between them and animal control. 

Maybe that could have been brushed off if the person running this rescue was not so vocal with the hate speech concerning AKC, breeders, and talking about working overtime to take this breeder out and now fundraising like heck off the dogs.... That muddies their motivations in this case and reflects badly on the rescue.


----------



## 3 goldens (Sep 30, 2005)

On my Great Pyrenees group on FB was the story and video of dogs rescued and the vidoes would almost turn your stomache. They were not only breeding Pyrs but others and they were penned in mud WITH ROTTING PIG CARCASSES. I suppose that was what they were eating. How the blazes anyone could get by with stuff like this is beyond me. How in the world could anyone see that kind of thing and buy a pup from those people. Why wouldn't they report it...tho in this case it had been reported a few times. This will continue until laws really crack down and take a toll on breeders (if you can call them that) like these.


----------



## GoldenGals (May 8, 2019)

Well let’s be transparent here. We can’t exactly expect any animal rescue volunteer to like the AKC. That’s like he saying I’m all for gun control but I don’t like you knocking the NRA. As long as the AKC keeps supporting puppy mills and blocking legislation that would make it easier for states and law enforcement to intervene in cases like this, they will be hated by any animal rescuer. I live in NH and we’ve had 2 high profile cases with AKC breeders in the last couple years and the AKC was vocal and instrumental in knocking it down. It was really upsetting to some of the sponsors of the bill. I have a friend who is a breeder in NH and obviously she didn’t want to have to get Inspected but she totally understood WHY it was needed and that bad breeders hurt the dogs and good breeders. Read up on the puppy mills in Tennessee and how they went backwards on puppy mill legislation. Rescues in MA and NH have strict regulations but the ACOs have no oversight of breeders . Also I’m not sure why you think that the rescue helping the ACO was underhanded ? The town had been dealing with issues for 17 years ! I have a friend in the next town over Ava she said it best - people that don’t know the situation are the only ones complaining about this. Anyone local is happy and thankful it is over. 17 years of complaints. That’s insane. So this rescue helps the ACO “take this woman down “ and you think it is under handed to ask the person that helped you bring a 17 year problem to an end to step aside while you find another rescue to take the dogs even though they are capable ? The second case in NH the dogs were not surrendered the breeder refused and it was a horrible court case details of which make your stomach turn. Some of those dogs were returned after the mistrial because she never surrendered then they were “evidence”. At least in this case the dogs get a chance. 

So maybe YGRR is upset because it was a missed opportunity but really maybe they should be looking at ways to strengthen ties to people like ACO’s? This can be a learning moment. It wasn’t that long ago that they started even assisting with Golden Mixes and now the dogs from China. Maybe given that the facility is startlingly empty for months at a time with considerable overhead (including $300,000 in salaries) maybe it is time to look to see what else can be done. Maybe assisting other rescues include lab rescue and community outreach to help out MA ACOs if they have any golden or lab mixes that need placement. The China transports are so few and far between if we are paying staff shouldn’t there be more dogs there ? Instead of lambasting the rescue that was asked to help let’s look at why YGRR wasn’t asked and what can be done differently so they are thought of as a local resource besides to us ? Sometimes injured pride causes us to misdirect our emotions towards the wrong party. How about accolades for the ACO and the rescue for saving these dogs ? Let’s make it about that not about who didn’t save them. I know that I’m old but the whine about it’s not fair they didn’t get a chance sounds so millennial I can’t take it. They didn’t help. They weren’t asked to help. Why do young people feel like it was “owed” to them to then get a chance to rehome the dogs ? And why are you bitter about fundraising - these dogs undoubtedly have medical issues. Wouldn’t YGRR have fundraised too ? My inbox is full of fundraising emails. I’m utterly confused over how fellow Golden lovers are so up in arms over WHO rescued these dogs as opposed to being happy they were rescued !


----------



## Prism Goldens (May 27, 2011)

GoldenGals said:


> Well let’s be transparent here. We can’t exactly expect any animal rescue volunteer to like the AKC. That’s like he saying I’m all for gun control but I don’t like you knocking the NRA. As long as the AKC keeps supporting puppy mills and blocking legislation that would make it easier for states and law enforcement to intervene in cases like this, they will be hated by any animal rescuer. I live in NH and we’ve had 2 high profile cases with AKC breeders in the last couple years and the AKC was vocal and instrumental in knocking it down. It was really upsetting to some of the sponsors of the bill. I have a friend who is a breeder in NH and obviously she didn’t want to have to get Inspected but she totally understood WHY it was needed and that bad breeders hurt the dogs and good breeders. ...
> So maybe YGRR is upset because it was a missed opportunity but really maybe they should be looking at ways to strengthen ties to people like ACO’s? This can be a learning moment. It wasn’t that long ago that they started even assisting with Golden Mixes and now the dogs from China. Maybe given that the facility is startlingly empty for months at a time with considerable overhead (including $300,000 in salaries) maybe it is time to look to see what else can be done. Maybe assisting other rescues include lab rescue and community outreach to help out MA ACOs if they have any golden or lab mixes that need placement. The China transports are so few and far between if we are paying staff shouldn’t there be more dogs there ? Instead of lambasting the rescue that was asked to help let’s look at why YGRR wasn’t asked and what can be done differently so they are thought of as a local resource besides to us ? Sometimes injured pride causes us to misdirect our emotions towards the wrong party. How about accolades for the ACO and the rescue for saving these dogs ? Let’s make it about that not about who didn’t save them. I know that I’m old but the whine about it’s not fair they didn’t get a chance sounds so millennial I can’t take it. They didn’t help. They weren’t asked to help. Why do young people feel like it was “owed” to them to then get a chance to rehome the dogs ? And why are you bitter about fundraising - these dogs undoubtedly have medical issues. Wouldn’t YGRR have fundraised too ? My inbox is full of fundraising emails. I’m utterly confused over how fellow Golden lovers are so up in arms over WHO rescued these dogs as opposed to being happy they were rescued !


I, for one, do not know YGRR is 'upset'- but as a GRCA member, active in every venue of Goldens including rescue, I personally am upset. For one, the funding is there FOR GOLDENS. It is a breed-specific rescue. I am of the opinion that when a breed specific rescue is local to a case, that rescue should be given the dog(s) which are obviously OF that breed. The woman's words on her FB page give me zero reason to direct any accolades her way. And in her own words, YGRR didn't even know about the situation nor were they given the opportunity to know because she and her group were in on the sting. I am far from young- and not a fan of out of order placements, etc- if there is a breed specific group the protocol should be that that group gets the dogs. If for no other reason than that they are pedigreed dogs and Yankee is more capable of understanding the pedigree and the problems that might be found in it. A Golden and a bag of PB puppies are two totally different skillsets. This SP rescue group is militant, YGRR is old school and mannerly. Regardless of the bad press, we do not know the truth of the 17 years, nor will we till it has court records to read. And there have been too many cases similar to just blanket believe the press which is bleeding heart. Bath or no bath, those dogs did not appear to be mistreated- if they had not been cared for they would have required shave downs.. for reference look @ the Foothills GRR in 2003- those dogs were mistreated. Angel weighed 22# .Homer had open wounds and weighed something like 35#. These are the two I remember well, there were like 20 more. Those dogs- no question. These dogs? Not so sure. None of the Foothills dogs were able to keep their coats, all had to be shaved because of the feces matted on them and the open sores. They were starved. These dogs appear well-fed. These dogs do not appear to be victims, but this rescue does appear to be enjoying their new role as media stars. That's all I have to say about it, and again, I am not defending the breeder- I have never heard of her. But the dogs look a wee bit too good to totally believe what she (rescue leader) is saying went down. 17 years might just be dog bark complaints for all we know (and actually dog bark by neighbor complaints was all I personally could document- no abuses).


----------



## Prism Goldens (May 27, 2011)

This is Angel- from Foothills GRR -


----------



## kjengold (Jun 19, 2007)

I keep thinking about Foothills GRR in 2003 too. I was there...I had never seen anything so horrific in my life...There were 25 goldens that had been in crates for weeks without water, food or being let out to relieve themselves. They were covered in urine and feces and literally skin and bones. Some were so weak they could not even walk.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

GoldenGals said:


> Well let’s be transparent here. We can’t exactly expect any animal rescue volunteer to like the AKC. That’s like he saying I’m all for gun control but I don’t like you knocking the NRA. As long as the AKC keeps supporting puppy mills and blocking legislation that would make it easier for states and law enforcement to intervene in cases like this, they will be hated by any animal rescuer. I live in NH and we’ve had 2 high profile cases with AKC breeders in the last couple years and the AKC was vocal and instrumental in knocking it down. It was really upsetting to some of the sponsors of the bill. I have a friend who is a breeder in NH and obviously she didn’t want to have to get Inspected but she totally understood WHY it was needed and that bad breeders hurt the dogs and good breeders.


Did you follow bill SB 569 last year? 

As initially introduced -

It would have defined any intact bitch (including puppies) as a breeding dog.

Anyone with 5 or more intact bitches (including puppies) defined as a commercial breeder. *

Opens breeders up to exposure to investigation over any complaint (no matter how legit the complaint).

Permits confiscation of dogs if charged with cruelty following complaints (no matter if those complaints or charges were false). And owners would have to pay $2000 per animal confiscated. 

^^^ This was crazily broad and would have opened more legit and decent breeders to exhaustible fines/fees, unreasonable search and confiscation, and being pushed into bankruptcy trying to get their dogs back. 

People would have had their dogs confiscated and adopted out before they had a chance to defend themselves against animal cruelty charges in court. And I'll be honest, I'm wondering a little if that has happened here.

AKC worked with the local legislature to amend the bill with more specific definitions of what a breeding female is (dog not bred in the past 18 months is not a breeding female) and then exempted people who compete in dog shows/trials/field/etc and other organized events and had not produced 10 or more litters or 50 or more puppies in the past year from having to be licensed by the state. 

They did not fight the bill because they wanted no regulations. They fought to have the bill amended to keep it from being used to attack all breeders, including those who are doing good.

And guess what? HSUS and other animal rights activists opposed the amended bill and I believe prevented it from being passed. What does that tell you about their intentions? 

I think current bills out there likewise are broadly written so as to make it easier for people to falsely accuse anyone of neglect or abuse, confiscate dogs, and profit off those confiscations. 

And too often, you have irrational and deluded people who think somehow the world would be a better place without any purebred dogs. Because they blame AKC for the influx of hound mixes and pit bull mixes and chihuahua mixes and dachshund mixes and every other kind of mixed-mess that ends up in shelters or that they are pulling from rural shelters in the south. 

If you like equivalents - that's like somebody finding goose poop all over their front yard... and blaming their next door neighbor's dog.

As it is - people should not be in constant fear of unreasonable search by animal control officers who are looking for reasons to take their dogs. As well, breeders in states with really terrible laws that enact heavy fees on them - it raises the cost of breeding, and inevitably down the road raises your puppy prices and discourages people from getting into dog breeding (which we need good conscientious breeders producing purebred and wellbred dogs). It also chases breeders out of your state and makes it that much more difficult for people to find a breeder who is willing to sell a puppy to them.

*I should note here that I have a friend who has not produce a single litter yet. She and her husband own 6 dogs. Two of those dogs are 2 or older. The others are all puppies of different ages. She does intend to breed down the road, but that's all down the road. She's putting titles (CH's and some obedience titles) on these dogs currently and will wait to get full clearances on the girls. 

If she had a single litter and kept a couple puppies to see how they turned out - she would be identified as a commercial breeder under that law. 

Other places out there who have already passed really crazy laws would already define my friend as a commercial breeder because she owns 5 or more intact dogs. 

AKC steps in to fight laws that are deliberately written broadly, etc... to protect people like my friend.


----------



## Tahnee GR (Aug 26, 2006)

This is an interesting read. 

https://www.p4pownership.com/apps/b...n5ytn8eDQaSRyedaZ8qtn1cE8B_B2I-QioZDsDU01lmzA


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

BTW - anyone interested in what's going on out there should check out the legislative alerts on AKC's website. You can see how/why AKC is working with local legislatures with current bills.

Here's another example concerning NH showing AKC urging people to push their representative to vote YES on a pending bill. 

https://www.akc.org/legislative-ale...s-animal-cruelty-cases-contact-lawmakers-now/

People should be paying attention anyway - particularly when it's legislation affecting your home state! Reasons why terrible laws get passed is because people either do not pay attention or are ignorant of how vague writing and loopholes would adversely affect dog ownership.


----------



## Prism Goldens (May 27, 2011)

Tahnee GR said:


> This is an interesting read.
> 
> https://www.p4pownership.com/apps/b...n5ytn8eDQaSRyedaZ8qtn1cE8B_B2I-QioZDsDU01lmzA


quite interesting!
This is the general feel I got re: this woman/her 'rescue' (and like I said, a bag of PB pups is not a bunch of Goldens who require a different skillset). I look forward to the rest of the uncovering of this 'rescue' who I suspect has some pretty ugly stuff to hide, other than the living expenses of the founder. 

A big piece of the problem is we have too many people who are into rescue that have zero idea re the laws and the difference between good and bad legislation. And they all feel so sorry for the dogs- sometimes wrongly. Of course the bag of PB puppies did not ask to be born, and should either be humanely euthanized or rescued.... but there is much more to this story than rescuing Goldens from a 'bad breeder'.


----------



## gdgli (Aug 24, 2011)

Trying to stay away from commenting but I would like to say something about this. I would like to get all the facts of the case. There must be more than what I get from reading 7 Boston News reporting which I do not find convincing. But then again I get suspicious when any kennel is raided. Talk to an animal rights lawyer (I have spoken to one) and you will understand why.


----------



## Peri29 (Aug 5, 2017)

Well , YGRR is appearantly not mad. Why should they? Total 35 GRs just arrived to Yankee 2 weeks ago from China. They do not work with foster like most of the GR rescues. They have their own beautiful facility but of course limited to fix amount of quarantine ( a week) and boarding. Each dog arriving from Turkey, Egypt or China is taken to quarantine where they are once more tested. They are trained on the facility and it takes months and months sometimes to home a Golden. To find the right family for the right golden. They are a very responsible rescue and I believe they know their capacity otherwise they would already volunteer for the rescuing of 28 GRs. 



Prism Goldens said:


> I, for one, do not know YGRR is 'upset'- but as a GRCA member, active in every venue of Goldens including rescue, I personally am upset. For one, the funding is there FOR GOLDENS. It is a breed-specific rescue. I am of the opinion that when a breed specific rescue is local to a case, that rescue should be given the dog(s) which are obviously OF that breed. The woman's words on her FB page give me zero reason to direct any accolades her way. And in her own words, YGRR didn't even know about the situation nor were they given the opportunity to know because she and her group were in on the sting. I am far from young- and not a fan of out of order placements, etc- if there is a breed specific group the protocol should be that that group gets the dogs. If for no other reason than that they are pedigreed dogs and Yankee is more capable of understanding the pedigree and the problems that might be found in it. A Golden and a bag of PB puppies are two totally different skillsets. This SP rescue group is militant, YGRR is old school and mannerly. Regardless of the bad press, we do not know the truth of the 17 years, nor will we till it has court records to read. And there have been too many cases similar to just blanket believe the press which is bleeding heart. Bath or no bath, those dogs did not appear to be mistreated- if they had not been cared for they would have required shave downs.. for reference look @ the Foothills GRR in 2003- those dogs were mistreated. Angel weighed 22# .Homer had open wounds and weighed something like 35#. These are the two I remember well, there were like 20 more. Those dogs- no question. These dogs? Not so sure. None of the Foothills dogs were able to keep their coats, all had to be shaved because of the feces matted on them and the open sores. They were starved. These dogs appear well-fed. These dogs do not appear to be victims, but this rescue does appear to be enjoying their new role as media stars. That's all I have to say about it, and again, I am not defending the breeder- I have never heard of her. But the dogs look a wee bit too good to totally believe what she (rescue leader) is saying went down. 17 years might just be dog bark complaints for all we know (and actually dog bark by neighbor complaints was all I personally could document- no abuses).


----------



## Swampcollie (Sep 6, 2007)

GoldenGals said:


> Well let’s be transparent here. We can’t exactly expect any animal rescue volunteer to like the AKC. That’s like he saying I’m all for gun control but I don’t like you knocking the NRA. As long as the AKC keeps supporting puppy mills and blocking legislation that would make it easier for states and law enforcement to intervene in cases like this, they will be hated by any animal rescuer. I live in NH and we’ve had 2 high profile cases with AKC breeders in the last couple years and the AKC was vocal and instrumental in knocking it down. It was really upsetting to some of the sponsors of the bill. I have a friend who is a breeder in NH and obviously she didn’t want to have to get Inspected but she totally understood WHY it was needed and that bad breeders hurt the dogs and good breeders. Read up on the puppy mills in Tennessee and how they went backwards on puppy mill legislation. Rescues in MA and NH have strict regulations but the ACOs have no oversight of breeders . Also I’m not sure why you think that the rescue helping the ACO was underhanded ? The town had been dealing with issues for 17 years ! I have a friend in the next town over Ava she said it best - people that don’t know the situation are the only ones complaining about this. Anyone local is happy and thankful it is over. 17 years of complaints. That’s insane. So this rescue helps the ACO “take this woman down “ and you think it is under handed to ask the person that helped you bring a 17 year problem to an end to step aside while you find another rescue to take the dogs even though they are capable ? The second case in NH the dogs were not surrendered the breeder refused and it was a horrible court case details of which make your stomach turn. Some of those dogs were returned after the mistrial because she never surrendered then they were “evidence”. At least in this case the dogs get a chance.
> 
> So maybe YGRR is upset because it was a missed opportunity but really maybe they should be looking at ways to strengthen ties to people like ACO’s? This can be a learning moment. It wasn’t that long ago that they started even assisting with Golden Mixes and now the dogs from China. Maybe given that the facility is startlingly empty for months at a time with considerable overhead (including $300,000 in salaries) maybe it is time to look to see what else can be done. Maybe assisting other rescues include lab rescue and community outreach to help out MA ACOs if they have any golden or lab mixes that need placement. The China transports are so few and far between if we are paying staff shouldn’t there be more dogs there ? Instead of lambasting the rescue that was asked to help let’s look at why YGRR wasn’t asked and what can be done differently so they are thought of as a local resource besides to us ? Sometimes injured pride causes us to misdirect our emotions towards the wrong party. How about accolades for the ACO and the rescue for saving these dogs ? Let’s make it about that not about who didn’t save them. I know that I’m old but the whine about it’s not fair they didn’t get a chance sounds so millennial I can’t take it. They didn’t help. They weren’t asked to help. Why do young people feel like it was “owed” to them to then get a chance to rehome the dogs ? And why are you bitter about fundraising - these dogs undoubtedly have medical issues. Wouldn’t YGRR have fundraised too ? My inbox is full of fundraising emails. I’m utterly confused over how fellow Golden lovers are so up in arms over WHO rescued these dogs as opposed to being happy they were rescued !


Oh, where to start.

Personal grudges and vindictive behavior don't help animals. In the long run it hurts them. 

In most rescue cases that your organization deals with there are no other options available for them. It's rescue with you or they will be put down. The number of animals you can help is limited by the resources you have available. when the resources are spent you can't help anymore animals. It's that simple.

The difference in this case is these are Golden Retrievers. Because of that they HAVE options open to them that your other rescue animals don't have. There are several breed specific organizations that have the resources on hand and available for the immediate needs of Golden Retrievers. They are ready and in place so shelters and rescue organizations such as yours do not have to deal with Golden Retrievers at all. 

So here is the reality. Your organization is doing a disservice to itself and the animals they say they're trying to help. You will be allocating resources that you do not yet possess, to dogs that have other options available to them, thus depleting resources that could have been spent on other animals that don't have those same opportunities. And the best part is you're organization is doing this out of vindictiveness and spite. 


Good luck trying to solicit donations when that news gets out.


----------



## GoldenDude (Nov 5, 2016)

I hope she wasn't breeding the dogs who escaped and bit a child.


----------



## mylissyk (Feb 25, 2007)

Swampcollie said:


> This is an organization that clearly was not prepared to take on the responsibility of 28 Golden Retrievers. They lack the facilities, knowledge, experience and financial resources necessary for the task. The organization should have had these things in place PRIOR to undertaking the task. The fact that they didn't speaks a great deal about them.
> 
> There are other breed specific rescues in the region that do possess the resources and networks to undertake such a task.
> 
> ...


I'm going to disagree with you. I am in rescue, it is common for rescues to be called upon to take in dogs without prior knowledge of the need. When we are called on to take in dogs that need help, medical, mental and housing, often the rescues do so without the resources immediately available - and then reach out the support base to assist with those intakes. 

Rescues have to rely on donations to take care of dogs they take in, fundraising is required. When you take in that large a number at one time, rescues have to raise funds. I don't understand why there is any backlash for needing funds to care for the dogs. The rescue has to provide for them, would you rather they didn't have the funds to do so? Having an issue with a rescue needing to raise funds makes no sense.


----------



## Brave (Oct 26, 2012)

The rescue I work with has gotten large "all hands on deck" type calls and emails will go out to all available foster homes and volunteers asking for placement. If the rescue doesn't have room though, they will decline the dogs. Fundraising that happens after the possession tends to be very factual and transparent. Which this doesn't seem to be. 

Regarding the situation in general, I have qualms about things coming across hinky. The dogs don't appear to be malnourished or in poor condition. The rescue keeps expounding on how all the dogs have multiple COSTLY problems (parasites, genetic conditions, etc) but doesn't go into specifics. The dogs don't appear unsocialized in videos (they are wagging their tails, approaching people, not reacting overly nervous or shy). Animal control cites they confiscated the dogs after determining they were 'dangerous dogs' but these same animals are being adopted out. 

I am frustrated by the vague media news, the biased rescue posts, the lack of factual information, the fact that the dogs are being placed and adopted out prior to the owner's criminal case being resolved. I'm frustrated that pedigreed dogs from a breeding program that from what I can see the breeder spent decades developing, are being spayed/neutered and adopted out instead of other accommodations being made. Other local breeders might want to take the dogs in to preserve the lines and the work of that breeding program. The owner, should have a say, in where her dogs are placed. 

I've seen many stories where animal hoarders who *should* have had criminal charges filed against them for animal abuse, were instead extended an offer to surrender all but a few of their animals to AC. These are people with intact animals and having multiple unplanned litters due to the mingling of intact animals. And dead carcasses from animals that have passed as a direct result of the hoarding. To me, it's odd that we're throwing the book at this person (MA Breeder) and not the other people. Why?

I read a lot of the comments on FB news stories and I think people are just reacting as "everything is abuse cause it's abuse" and not waiting for facts or thinking critically. These are the same people who complain silly dog videos are abusive. And if these same people were given the right to write legislation, I would hope the groups I support would fight for LOGICAL AND FAIR animal rights laws. 

I look forward to seeing how this turns out once the facts can come to light.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Jennifer - THANKS! 

I think possibly people are under the impression that people are just anti-rescue and not adequately considering the good work that rescues DO. And the worst thing in my mind is that questionable situations and questionable people running rescues who absolutely are making money off the work they do - they do serious harm to the good rescues in their company. They do harm to their volunteers too! 

I think that people need to do better accounting of where all the dogs are coming from and identify if there are "repeat offenders". There shouldn't be "breeders" using rescues as a consignment option....


----------



## GoldenDude (Nov 5, 2016)

Brave said:


> I am frustrated by...the fact that the dogs are being placed and adopted out prior to the owner's criminal case being resolved.



That rests at the feet of the judge and the defendant. The judge made surrendering the dogs a condition of bail and the defendant agreed to that bail condition. (I have a lot of reservations about such a bail clause. It seems unfair if you're eventually found not guilty but I'm not a lawyer so what do I know.)


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

GoldenDude said:


> That rests at the feet of the judge and the defendant. The judge made surrendering the dogs a condition of bail and the defendant agreed to that bail condition. (I have a lot of reservations about such a bail clause but I'm not a lawyer.)


That's so scary. Because this could happen to anyone....  

Knowing what has happened in other false accusation cases (dogs confiscated and people charged with enormous sums for boarding which they have to pay or be forced to surrender their dogs) - I thought that was bad enough. 

But imprisoning an individual under unknown or unproven charges and forcing her to give up her animals.... 

What happens if they can't prove the charges? 

She obviously can't get her dogs back if she signed them away under threat of imprisonment!


----------



## mylissyk (Feb 25, 2007)

That sounds like it should be illegal, to require the owner surrender the dogs or she doesn't get bail? Surely that can't be legal.


----------



## GoldenDude (Nov 5, 2016)

mylissyk said:


> That sounds like it should be illegal, to require the owner surrender the dogs or she doesn't get bail? Surely that can't be legal.


I can see why, as a matter of public policy, judges can set bail conditions. Many might argue it’s reasonable for a judge to set a no driving rule as a bail condition for someone who’s been arrested on suspicion of DUI or for a judge to issue a no contact order, as a bail condition, for someone who’s been arrested for domestic violence. 

According to news reports, she was charged with felony animal cruelty so I’d imagine a judge has leeway on bail conditions for a felony arrest. (I’d argue people are often overcharged at their first hearing but that gets into an even bigger philosophical issue than the topic of bail already is.)


----------



## mylissyk (Feb 25, 2007)

GoldenDude said:


> I can see why, as a matter of public policy, judges can set bail conditions. Many might argue it’s reasonable for a judge to set a no driving rule as a bail condition for someone who’s been arrested on suspicion of DUI or for a judge to issue a no contact order, as a bail condition, for someone who’s been arrested for domestic violence.
> 
> According to news reports, she was charged with felony animal cruelty so I’d imagine a judge has leeway on bail conditions for a felony arrest. (I’d argue people are often overcharged at their first hearing but that gets into an even bigger philosophical issue than the topic of bail already is.)


Yes, it would make sense to set a no driving condition, or no contact condition, but requiring them to sign over ownership of property in order to be released from prison does not sound legal, especially since the all the charges are related to the property they required she surrender.


----------



## solinvictus (Oct 23, 2008)

No due process. No innocent until proven guilty.  This isn't right but it is happening more and more and can happen to anyone. It goes against her constitutional rights. Without large amounts of money, a good lawyer and a support system any breeder is a sitting duck no matter if they are a good one or not.


----------



## Julie Timmons (Dec 16, 2016)

The bottom line is that the dogs don't care about their genetics, they don't care about breeding, they don't care about money, they don't care about politics. They want and deserve a good and loving home. THAT should be everyone's main concern. 

Sweet Paws Rescue is local to me, I have nothing but respect for them and what they do. They are NOT a shelter, they have an INTAKE building. In fact, they don't even have a permanent sign on the building. They have a banner they string up on the door with bungee cords on the days they are intaking dogs. Many people commenting on various platforms have been following SPR for a couple of weeks since this hit the news. There are a lot of people stirring up the pot for whatever personal reason they have because the publicity was huge on this intake but they have no real knowledge of the situation or of the work this rescue has been doing. I have been following them for a couple of years, I have filled out their EXTENSIVE application for adopting and let me tell you, it is much more in depth than many I filled out for Golden breeders when I was searching for my pup 2 yrs ago. 

I will remain in support of them until I see actual proof that they did anything wrong, and by proof I don't mean someone's personal opinion and conjecture written on their blog in conspiracy style format. 

Megora posted a link on page one of this post that contains some of the timeline of events that have lead up to the removal of these dogs. Everyone should have at least read that before commenting. 

This rescue stepped in when asked to do so, if you think one of the golden rescues should have control of the dogs, start questioning the ACO. It was their decision on where to place the dogs.


----------



## Julie Timmons (Dec 16, 2016)

solinvictus said:


> No due process. No innocent until proven guilty. This isn't right but it is happening more and more and can happen to anyone. It goes against her constitutional rights. Without large amounts of money, a good lawyer and a support system any breeder is a sitting duck no matter if they are a good one or not.



I agree that would be unfair to someone wrongly accused but take the case in NH with 36 German Shephards caught in the middle of a court case that has been going on for 17 months and is still not over. These dogs have been kenneled in the NHSPCA for all of that time. There were 29 additional dogs that did not "get the chance" to be kenneled this long as they all died in what was deemed a negligent fire which started the case in Dec 2017. In Apr of 2019, the trial resulted in a hung jury, so it's still not over for these poor dogs. 

At this point, I could care less about the breeder, these dogs deserve homes. I realize that is going to sting for some of you but I don't think these GSs care about anyone's hurt feelings.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

> At this point, I could care less about the breeder, these dogs deserve homes.


This point of view from anyone is the reason why laws are getting so aggressive against people who want to openly own, breed, show, compete with their dogs. We are enabling animal rights freaks to harass dog owners and put their dogs through hell. 

It does not help matters if people keep comparing to actual abuse cases where the dogs are starving, neglected, and really badly off. 

These dogs were not starving - a few of them looked pretty heavy. Needing grooming is not a sign of neglect - if it were, majority of dog owners would be in huge trouble. Because their dogs need to bathed and groomed more frequently and regularly. Running a pin brush through the outer coat does NOTHING. Being kept outside or inside in crates - neither is OK imo, but majority of people out there do it.

I have to put an exclamation point on that - if GRF members knew how many good breeders keep their dogs outside in dog runs or in kennels - they would be a bit surprised. These things are not marks of whether a dog breeder is a good one or not. 

And might add, even if the dog breeders are keeping all the dogs indoors and sleeping in their beds - that's not what happens when the dogs are sent out with pro handlers. 

And homes being filthy - it's not nice, but actually it happens when you have 1 person taking care of many dogs + a litter of puppies. One of the reasons why some breeders prefer outdoor runs and kennels - it's because it keeps the house clean. It may be this woman is a hoarder? Or unable to take proper care of things - I've heard nothing specific along those lines. Just that the house was filthy. 

The rescue claimed the dogs never saw a vet? But they had full clearances. This means that these dogs saw more specialists than most regular pets do. 

The other thing is there is no specific explanation as to what this woman is being charged of - other than breaking the law concerning getting rabies vaccinations (and forging something along those lines) and being constantly in trouble for having her dogs outside and barking. 

There was something about her taking a dead puppy to be examined at the vet - which seems to have to started all this. That's sad, but by itself isn't indicative of abuse or something going on. 

The thing I posted earlier actually implies harassment of both the dogs and the owner. 

The equivalent I know of was a neighbor's lab who was harassed every day by kids going around the block and throwing things at him without the owners knowledge. 

The owner refused to bring the dog inside and this turned out bad because one of those days the dog ran through the wire and attacked one of the kids harassing him. He mauled the kid. Ripped his face off. There was NO DOUBT which dog bit the kid and what happened. 

The lack of clarity as to what actually happened + which dog did it - implies that there were kids harassing the dogs without the breeder's knowledge. The audio of kids laughing and then later screaming as they ran away also implies harassment. 

As well, somebody saying they've been trying for 17 years to put this breeder out of business - implies harassment. 

And the idea that this woman was put in jail and forced to surrender her dogs in order to get out of jail and defend herself - that's stuff that could happen to you or anyone else. 

Quite frankly as attached as most of us are to our dogs - we would be in a very bad and awful place if we had our dogs taken away like this. I'm speaking lightly here, but keep in mind I'm still mourning the loss of a dog who died 10 months ago. And my dogs are everything. I can't begin to fathom having my dogs ripped away under false accusation. 

As long as there is a hint of those accusations and charges being false - it freaks and scares the heck out of me. And absolutely I'm seeing myself in that position. That's what anyone and everyone should do in any case.


----------



## Julie Timmons (Dec 16, 2016)

My comment about the dogs needing homes now was about the Shepards stuck in limbo for 15 months and counting. That’s just sad no matter what side of the fence you are on. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Julie Timmons said:


> My comment about the dogs needing homes now was about the Shepards stuck in limbo for 15 months and counting. That’s just sad no matter what side of the fence you are on.
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Julie - There is no equivalent between the case of those 30 GSD's and these dogs.

There are being treated the same - and that's what's wrong. 

This isn't about claiming the fence you want to hide behind. 

This is about viewing each case with clear eyes and holding judgement until somebody is proven guilty. 

And it's also about telling people like yourself and others to be more cautious about giving up their rights. Particularly considering those laws being passed are being abused by activists.


----------

