# Talk about giving rescues a bad name...



## artgecko (Nov 26, 2013)

Here's a news story that you guys may or may not have heard about. I will post two articles, one an older article, and then an update article that is more recent. Apparently, a dog escaped from a yard and was seized by animal control. Said dog was chipped, but animal control couldn't contact the vet listed on the chip info because it was a holiday weekend. On that Monday, having met their "three day holding period" and without contacting the vet (whose phone number they had), they released the dog to a breed rescue group. Said group didn't try to contact the owner. When they were contacted by the owner, they demanded proof of ownership (beyond the chip info), then still refused to turn over the dog... Claiming that even though the owner could prove the dog "was" hers, the dog was no longer hers because it was given to them by animal control and is thus, legally, theirs now. This case has gone on for over a year with the rescue refusing to give the animal back and even going so far as to hide the animal. 

Playing into this story is the fact that the owner is a breeder and the dog is a champion sheltie and was bred by and owned by said breeder (so maybe they don't want to give her back because she is owned by a breeder?)... Also playing into it could be the issue of so-called "rescue" groups that basically flip dogs for profit and might not want to let go of a very profitable animal (again, maybe they are going to illicitly breed the animal and then place the "rescue" puppies, or at least be able to charge a hefty sum for the good looking sheltie mother).... 

No matter where you stand on ethical breeding and rescuing, surely this has to scare you... That a "rescue" or "shelter" could take possession of your animal and then do their utmost not to return that animal to you even with proof of ownership. In this case, the owner has had to shell out $100,000 in court fees so far and still it has not been resolved.. I guess we know where that rescue's donation money went for the year... Just think of all the animals that could have been helped with those funds and all so that the rescue wouldn't return an animal to it's rightful owner. 

I hate this for reputable rescues.. This has to make them look bad. From some of the comments, it is actually making people rethink traveling through Ohio with their pets or going to dog shows there for fear that something similar could happen to their pets. 

I'd love to hear what you guys think about this.

Here is the original article. 

And here is an update article.


----------



## lkoechle (Aug 5, 2015)

Crazy. We have had issues with greyhounds being stolen and people refusung to return them even though you can prove ownership via microchip, ear tatts, and the NGRA database which tracks each dog to their rescue group and adopted home after they leave the track. People are crazy. I can't believe they would refuse to return this dog. Something shady is going on. I live in Colorado and for months MONTHS there was this sketchy "llost dog" sign that first stated it was a "mini collie" later signs called it a "sheltie" and used the picture/drawing you see on the AKC breed description page. There was no name, no gender, no indentifying features listed on the poster. My husband and I are convinced it was someone attnepting to obtain a free sheltie at the expense of the true owner. I smell the same shiftiness from this rescue.


----------



## artgecko (Nov 26, 2013)

I agree... If/when I get a dog I will definitely be housing it indoors when I am not there to supervise..Just in case someone is trolling to steal dogs. I read an additional article about the case. Apparently, the lawyer for the "rescue" is donating his time for free... So they aren't paying as much in court costs as the owner / breeder.


----------

