“Ginger’s Pet Rescue is a volunteer-based 501(c)3 non-profit organization that relies on donations to fund rescue efforts. We are a volunteer based network of fosters support the rescue of homeless dogs. We couldn’t function without the support of our donors. There are no salaries, as we are all volunteer.” – Ginger’s Pet Rescue website

My research shows this statement from Ginger’s Pet Rescue is FALSE. Ginger’s Pet Rescue has had paid staff for the last several years.

In January 2022, I wrote an article showing that Ginger’s Pet Rescue paid founder Ginger Luke over $300,000 in 2019 and 2020 (Ginger’s Pet Rescue Paid Founder Over $300k in 2019 & 2020).

These payments were significantly higher than the rescue previously paid Ms. Luke. Here’s how much the rescue paid Ms. Luke from 2015 – 2020:

2015 $5200
2016 $35,600
2017 $18,900
2018 $19,200
2019 $138,312
2020 $163,801

From 2018 to 2019, her salary increased by 620%. It went up more than 18% the following year.

Ms. Luke’s average salary for 2019-2020 represented more than 15% of the rescue’s average revenue during the same period. That’s a significantly higher percentage than any of the major Seattle area rescues I examined.

Homeward Pet Adoption Center had the next highest percentage of average CEO salary to average organizational revenue at only 4.5%.

And although Seattle Humane Society’s average revenue was more than 12 times higher than that of Ginger’s Pet Rescue ($12.4 million vs. $970,933), Ms. Luke’s average salary was almost the same as that of Seattle Humane’s CEO ($151,057 vs. $162,197).

In addition, Ms. Luke’s salary was 15.7% of the rescue’s average revenue. Seattle Humane’s CEO made $162,297, which was only 1.3% of its average revenue.

I don’t have a problem if people who run large, multifaceted animal rescues make a reasonable salary. But the fact that Ms. Luke, whose organization’s revenue averaged less than $1 million, made almost as much at the CEO of the Seattle Humane Society, which averaged over $12 million in revenue, is ethically questionable.

Although Ms. Luke passed away in September of 2021, the rescue continued to pay what I believe are exorbitant, inappropriate salaries for a charity of its size.

Ms. Luke was head of the rescue’s Board of Directors until 2020. After that, a woman named Sian Bond, who previously wasn’t on the board, is listed as its Chair. I assume that means she is now head of the organization although the group’s website mentions nothing about this transition.

As you can see above, in 2021 Ginger Pet Rescue reported on its IRS Form 990 that it paid Ms. Bond $98,900. The IRS Form 990 below shows that in 2022 the rescue reported that it paid Ms. Bond $81,250 and a woman named Amber Journeaux $60,000. Ms. Journeaux is listed as Secretary of the board in 2021 although she didn’t get any compensation that year.

To make a fair assessment these payments I Iooked at the salaries for the CEOs at the Seattle Humane Society in Bellevue, Homeward Pet Adoption Center in Woodinville, The NOAH Center in Stanwood, and the Humane Society for Tacoma/Pierce County in Tacoma from 2015-2022.

I then checked the groups’ revenue to get an idea of the size of the organizations. I also looked at the percentage of average revenue their CEOs’ salaries represented.

This information came from the groups’ 990s, which are financial statements they must to submit to the IRS annually. Some of the groups hadn’t turned in their 990s for 2022 to the IRS yet so I didn’t have their information for that year.

This chart does not include the $60,000 payment to Ms. Journeaux in 2022 since her role in the organization is unclear.

You can find the detail behind this data at the end of this post.

Even without factoring in Ms. Journeaux’s salary, Ginger’s Pet Rescue continues to pay its CEO a huge percentage of its total income (13.2%) compared to what larger rescues pay their CEOs.

The Seattle Humane Society only pays its CEO 1.4% of its total income despite the fact that its income is more than 9 times larger than Ginger’s Pet Rescue.

As I noted in my previous post, the IRS is the federal agency that determines whether or not an organization can be classified as a 501(c)(3) charity. Charitable organizations are exempt from paying taxes and contributions to them are tax deductible. 

The IRS has no specific rules regarding how much a charity can pay its staff; however, its Compliance Guide for 501(c)(3) Public Charities states that:

“A public charity is prohibited from allowing more than an insubstantial accrual of private benefit to individuals or organizations. This restriction is to ensure that a tax-exempt organization serves a public interest, not a private one. If a private benefit is more than incidental, it could jeopardize the organization’s tax-exempt status.”

The guide goes on to say specifically that no part of an organization’s net earnings “may inure to the benefit of an insider.” It defines an insider as “a person who has a personal or private interest in the activities of the organization such as an officer, director, or a key employee.”

The IRS notes that an example of a prohibited inurement includes “payment of unreasonable compensation to an insider.”

So according to the IRS, Ms. Bond and Ms. Journeaux were insiders at the time of their excessive salary payments because both of them were officers, a directors, and key employees.

Because of Ms. Bond’s excessive salary in 2021 and 2022 and the $60,000 payment to Ms. Jopurneaux, and because the percentage of their salaries compared to the rescue’s revenue was approximately 3-9 times higher than that of other CEOs of much larger rescues in the region, I believe their salaries during that period were prohibited inurements as defined by the IRS.

In addition to paying excessive salaries, Ginger’s Pet Rescue charges astronomical adoption fees.

This isn’t new news. In the recent past, Ginger’s charged up to $800 to adopt a dog, which was already significantly higher than other local rescues charge.

But while researching this story I found that the rescue is now charging up to $2500 to adopt a dog. That’s more than many breeders charge for their puppies!

When I saw Ginger’s raised its already high prices to adopt a dog, I looked at how much the rescue charged for each dog on its website.

On September 17th I viewed all the dogs available for adoption that Ginger’s had its website. I found a total of 56 dogs with prices ranging from $595 to $2500.

The average price Ginger’s charged for these dogs was $1451! Compare that to the adoption fees of other major rescues around Seattle:

Seattle Human Society: $285-$460
Homeward Pet: $75-$375
The NOAH Center: $125-$425
Humane Society for Tacoma/Pierce County: $80-$500

The lowest prices are usually for senior dogs and the highest prices for puppies.

According to these prices, the lowest price Ginger’s Pet Rescue charges is more than the highest prices these rescue charge. And out of the 56 dogs I saw on Ginger’s website that day, only 9 of them had a fee of less than $1000. That means 84% of them would have cost you more than $1000.

I’ve asked people at the rescue (including Ginger Luke when she was alive) why their adoption fees are so high. The only answer I’ve gotten is that bringing dogs here from Korea is expensive.

However, Ginger’s adoption fees are also higher than some other groups that rescue dogs from the Korean dog meat industry for adoption:

Korean Paws Rescue charges $250-$650
Free Korean Dogs charges $280-$780
KOCA Dog Rescue charges up to $1000

Furthermore, the total amount of salaries Ginger’s paid in 2022 ($158,900) was almost as much it says it paid on overseas dog rescue ($171,520). How many more dogs could the rescue have saved if it didn’t pay employees such outrageous salaries?

As I’ve said before, organizations designated as charities by the IRS don’t have to pay state or federal income taxes so they have more money available to use for the charitable purposes for which they were created. Also, it’s easier for them to raise money because donor contributions are tax deductible.

In return for these entitlements, none of their earnings may provide an excessive benefit to any employee or board member. They must also explain to the IRS their processes for determining these payments.

This ensures that resources aren’t diverted from an organization’s charitable purposes and into the pocket of an individual for their own benefit. 

In my opinion, Ginger’s Pet Rescue’s own filings with the IRS shows excessive payments that provide a private benefit to its staff.

These payments, along with astronomical adoption fees, raise red flags that I believe should be investigated by the IRS. In addition, I believe the Washington Attorney General should determine the legality of the rescue’s statement that “There are no salaries, as we are all volunteers.”

I also hope that anyone in the Seattle area planning to adopt a dog knows that they don’t have to pay $2000 or more to get one. They can adopt one from several reputable local rescue groups for much less.

Here is all the data I collected regarding CEO Salary, Yearly Revenue, and CEO Salary % of Income for the largest pet rescue groups in the Seattle area from 2015-2022:

Share This!

The post Ginger’s Pet Rescue Paid Over $140k to Staff, Charged Average of $1400+ for Dog Adoption in 2022 appeared first on Seattle DogSpot.

Multiple Complaints Against Backyard Breeder

Grays Harbor County could finally take action against a backyard breeder who has been the subject of multiple complaints for several years.

Gail Oaksmith has been breeding and selling dogs and since 2007. She primarily sells mixed breeds, some of which are “designer breeds” like labradoodles (labrador/poodle), chiweenies (dachshund/chihuahua), and puggles (pug/beagle).

Here are just some of the complaints about Ms. Oaksmith people sent to Grays Harbor County Animal Control since 2015:

“REQ CALL REF HORRIBLE LIVING CONDITIONS AT A “PUPPY FARM” AT LOC. OWNER’S NAME IS GAIL 360 273 4499 – URINE AND FECES EVERYWHERE, NO FOOD AND WATER VISIBLE.” (March, 2017)

“REQ CALL REF NEIGHBOR/GALE UNK LAST – 4 OF HER DOGS (A GREAT DANE, 2 RED IRISH SETTERS AND A SMALL BLK DOG) KILLED HER CAT ON HER PROPERTY PAST HOUR. ONGOING PROBLEM W/ THEM COMING ONTO HER PROPERTY. GALE HAS MANY DOGS.” (April, 2017)

“We purchased our dachshund mix puppy from Gail on 6/10/2018 and brought her in for a vet exam on 6/13. The attached results show positive test results for giardia and tapeworm.” (June, 2018)

“REQ CALL REF RP RESPONDED TO AD ON CRAIGSLIST FOR GOLDEN RETRIEVER PUPPIES A FEW DAYS PAST, SHE HAD MULT DIFF BREED DOGS IN TENTS OUTSIDE, PUPPIES DID NOT HAVE CLEAN WATER, HAD NO FOOD, RP TOOK 2 DOGS DUE TO FEELING BAD AND THEY HAD FLEA INFESTATIONS, EAR INFECTIONS, UNDERWEIGHT.” (September, 2018)

“The floors of the pen were soaked in mud from the rain and fecal matter everywhere, all the puppies completely covered, and loose chicken wire was in their cages which have left scars on their bellies from running over the top of it. Gail stated that she had not fed the dogs yet today. Then to the left of the pen we noticed a small Pomeranian with most of its hair missing and one eye missing. Gail informed us that she could not let it out of its pen because it had lost its eye, the dog was extremely lethargic.” (September, 2018)

“Driving back to gig harbor we immediately noticed the state the puppies we collected were in. Both dogs were covered in fleas from head to toe, both were extremely skinny with swollen sickly bellies.” (September, 2018)

“After arriving to our home, we directly went to bathe and remove fleas from both pups. We had to completely renew the water in the tub 4 times because it was repeatedly black with mud from the puppies. We combed out hundreds of fleas and larvae from the puppy’s bodies.” (September, 2018)

“both puppies had contracted every parasite that known in the state of Washington and that these were the most elaborate samples that they had seen.” (September, 2018)

“40-60 DOGS AT LOC IN POOR HEALTH AND LIVING IN BAD COND, APPEARS SOME HAVE BEEN FIGHTING THERE WAS 1 W/ OPEN WOUNDS ON FACE.” (November, 2018)

“We paid 200 for one of the puppies, and were giving an incomplete shot record. Many of the dogs were generally in poor health and many had missing legs or eyes.” (December 2018)

“REQ CALL REF GAIL OAKSMITH WHO LIVES AT LOC, RP WENT THERE TO PURCHASE A PUPPY ON SATURDAY AND THERE WERE MORE DOGS THEN SHE WAS ABLE TO COUNT. MULT DIFF BREEDS IN DIFFERENT PLACES ON THE PROPERTY. THE SMALLER BREED DOGS ARE IN THE HOUSE, USING THE BATHROOM, VERY UNSANITARY CONDITIONS – RP STILL PURCHASED A PUPPY, DOG SMELLED OF URINE AND FECES.” (September, 2022)

The most common complaints were that Ms. Oaksmith had too many dogs on the property and that the puppies people bought had giardia and/or several types of worms.

Nicole Pollard is the Animal Control Officer for Grays Harbor County. I asked her, given the number of complaints filed against Ms. Oasksmith, how this puppy mill has been allowed to continue operating operating and why she never recommended that charges should be filed against Ms. Oaksmith. Here are her explanations.

Too Many Dogs on Property

The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) states that “A person may not own, possess, control, or otherwise have charge or custody of more than fifty dogs with intact sexual organs over the age of six months at any time.” (RCW 16.52.310(1))

In other words, as long as a breeder doesn’t have 50+ dogs over 6 months of age with intact sexual organs, there is no limit to the number of dogs breeders can have on their property.

In a memo from 2018, Officer Pollard noted that Ms. Oaksmith “has a large number of adult dogs and their offspring on her property. Most of the time she is right around the maximum number of unaltered adult dogs that are over the age of six months (50). The number of young offspring varies. It is not uncommon to find a total of 80-100 dogs on her property.”

This is a huge loophole that backyard breeders can exploit. There should be some limit to the number of dogs a breeder can have on their property regardless of how many of them have sexually intact organs.

By all accounts, Ms. Oaksmith runs a disorganized system with dogs haphazardly scattered around the property.

Some are in fenced areas, some are in her house, others run free on the property. If she had close to the maximum of intact dogs over six months old on her property I can’t see how she could monitor/control their breeding.

Allowing a backyard breeder like Ms. Oaksmith to have so many dogs on her property is ridiculous.

Multiple Puppies Infested with Parasites

Washington has 2 laws regarding animal health and parasites – RCW 16.36 (Animal Health) and RCW 16.70 (Control of pet animals infected with diseases communicable to humans).

I believe the rule most applicable to Ms. Oaksmith is RCW 16.36.082 which states:

(1) It is unlawful for any person to sell, exchange, or give away any animal that he or she knows:
(a) Is infected with any contagious, infectious, or communicable disease;
(b) Has been exposed to any contagious, communicable, or infectious disease within the previous thirty days; or
(c) Has been treated for any condition within the previous thirty days;

Ms. Oaksmith knows that she sold multiple puppies diagnosed with giardia and other parasites, primarily worms. She claims a vet told her she couldn’t do anything about it giardia because “it was everywhere in the ground and water. Oaksmith advised that she just warns people when they purchase a puppy/dog that she has had giardia on the property.”

WSDA Oversees Animal Health, Parasite Regulations

When I asked Officer Pollard why she didn’t cite Ms. Oaksmith for violating RCW 16.36.082, she told me something I didn’t know: The Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) and/or its local agents are responsible for enforcing regulations regarding animal health and parasites.

Officer Pollard forwarded the reports of giardia and other parasites in the puppies she sold to the WSDA and Jeff Nelson, the Environmental Health Director for Grays Harbor County; both Mr. Nelson and John Price from the WSDA declined to take action against Ms. Oaksmith because “the risk (of transmission) to the public and other animals was very low.”

WSDA Concerned How Parasites Effect Humans, Not Dogs

I asked Mr. Nelson to clarify the RCW because it doesn’t appear to give any leeway with regard to enforcement. Specifically, according to the wording of RCW 16.36.082, the law applies regardless of how low the risk of transmission may be.

However, Mr. Nelson noted that the WSDA and its local agents cannot cite a breeder for selling puppies full of parasites unless there’s a threat to the public health of humans.

In other words, because the parasites in the puppies purchased from Ms. Oaksmith didn’t threaten public health, he had no legal justification to cite her for violating RCW 16.36.082.

So if you report a backyard breeder who sells dogs full of parasites, the WSDA will do nothing. And since animal control agencies don’t have the legal authority cite breeders for selling dogs full of parasites, unscrupulous breeders like Ms. Oaksmith can sell them with no concern about being held accountable.

Animal Control: No Evidence of Unhealthy Dogs/Puppies

On one of the reports that Officer Pollard submitted about Ms. Oaksmith in early 2018, Dave Pimentel, the former Deputy Sheriff of Grays Harbor County wrote a note to Officer Pollard that said, “Stay on top of this and let’s fix this problem. We will end up on the news before long with this.”

Yet Officer Pollard said that she had been to Ms. Oasksmith’s property multiple times but didn’t see any evidence of unhealthy dogs/puppies.

Officer Pollard also said she never saw puppies covered in filth and living in urine/feces as some people noted in their complaints.

Because Officer Pollard that Ms. Oaksmith had more dogs than the law allows, didn’t have the authority to enforce animal health regulations, and never found subpar living conditions for the dogs on Ms. Oaksmith’s property, she never recommended that the county take action against her.

She said she never told Ms. Oaksmith when she was going to inspect her property unless she made a “surprise” visit and Ms. Oaksmith wasn’t there.

Given the number and similarity of complaints for years regarding Ms. Oaksmith’s treatment of her dogs, I just don’t understand how Officer Pollard found no evidence of abuse or unhealthy animals.

In my opinion, either Ms. Oaksmith had advanced notice of pending inspections so she had time to clean up before officers arrived, or officers didn’t conduct a thorough inspection of her property.

New Complaint Shows Multiple Cases of Abuse by Backyard Breeder

Alyssa Mount is a dog groomer in Bonney Lake. She first became aware of Ms. Oaksmith’s breeding operation last September when a client told her about the puppy a friend bought from Ms. Oaksmith.

He said the breeder had a dog that was “in horrible condition that needed a groom asap.”

Here’s how Alyssa described the dog her client brought in:

“When he arrived, his new owner mentioned that he did not move at all and I noticed his nose and up his snout was all black which was odd for a golden colored dog. As soon as I got him into the tub and starting running the water on him, the black on his snout started to move around I quickly realized he was infested with fleas. As I ran the water more along his back and body, the water that was running off was bloody and I could see hundreds and hundreds of fleas crawling all over him.”

The client told Alyssa that Ms. Oaksmith still had two of the puppy’s littermates. Assuming they were also in terrible condition, she decided to go with 2 friends to Ms. Oaksmith’s property to see the dogs there for herself.

Backyard Breeder’s Property Covered with Fleas and Feces

Here’s what Alyssa told me they saw when the arrived at Ms. Oaksmith’s property:

“When we arrived, we noticed a cream poodle tied to a pole to the left while approx. 20 other adult dogs ran around us and the car and the property. While we were still in the car, I saw poodles, golden retrievers, basset hounds, golden doodles and a boston terrier running up to the car. The moment that we got out of the car, I noticed fleas jumping all over us (I was wearing open toed shoes) from the ground and the dogs that were greeting us…..She took us to the puppies on her back deck that had poop all over and broken chicken wire.

Some of the dogs were “Boston terrier pug mixes and French bulldogs that had chunks of hair missing.” Ms. Oaksmith then showed her a Pomeranian that had “extremely thin hair and said that she once had beautiful Pomeranian hair but she too had ripped her own hair out.”

Most of the puppies were covered in feces and fleas.

Alyssa bought 7 dogs of the worst looking dogs from Ms. Oaksmith that day – 5 doodle mixes and 2 standard poodles. The doodles were 17 weeks old and the poodles were 7 months old.

Flea-infested Dogs, Bloody Bath Water

After Alyssa and her friends arrived at her home with the dogs, they began the arduous process of cleaning them up. Alyssa said the dogs’ fur was so matted she had to shave all of them.

She then had to bathe them 4 times to get rid of all the fleas. The dog had so many fleas, the bath water turned bloody.

One of the dogs also “had an ear infection, anemia, parasites, and an infected hind end wound that needed antibiotics.”

While she was at the property, she also saw a black poodle that was “extremely skinny.” When Alyssa asked if she could buy him, Ms. Oaksmith told her that she couldn’t sell him because he was “extremely sick and she is treating him for parasites.”

Ms. Oaksmith also told her that she didn’t want Alyssa to sue her “if he dies after we take him home.” She did agree to sell Alyssa his 2 littermates.

Another Trip to Rescue Starving Dog

Although she had her hand full with the 7 dogs she bought/saved, Alyssa couldn’t get the image of the skinny, listless black poodle that Ms. Oaksmith refused to sell out of her mind, so she called to see if she could buy him.

“I called Gail every day to ask if I could have Oliver (sick black poodle) and she said that she didn’t want to get sued so she’s not going to sell him. She finally said that I could have a black 2 year old female that she has and I could take Oliver if I bought her for $400 but I had to sign a paper that said I wouldn’t sue her and that I know he is sick and may die.”

Alyssa and a friend then went back to the property to pick up the two dogs. Alyssa said the female she agreed to buy in order to save Oliver “smelled like gas. And Oliver was “covered in fleas and urine.”

While walking back to the car her friend saw a dog that Gail said was “the ugliest dog on her property.” She told me that she didn’t adopt Dolly out because she had entropion in both eyes and that she didn’t want to spend $700 on surgery and that her eyes fixed themselves and by then she was too old for anyone to want her.”

She and Alyssa ended up taking Dolly as well.

Oliver “Should Not Be Alive”

Like the other dogs Alyssa rescued, these three dogs were filthy and covered in fleas. But as she shaved Oliver’s hair in order to bathe him, Alyssa realized he was in much worse condition than she originally thought.

After shaving and bathing Oliver, Alyssa said she could see “every bone in his body.”

As she washing him, she also noticed an untreated wound on his hind leg.

You can see from the pictures and videos that Oliver didn’t just suffer from neglect. He endured unimaginable cruelty that in my opinion was nothing short of torture.

Both ER vets who treated Oliver said “he should not be alive.”

Alyssa bought a total of 12 dogs from Ms. Oaksmith and spent over $10,000 on their medical bills. She ended up adopting Oliver and found homes for all the other dogs.

Statements About Condition of Other Dogs

Here are statements from two people who adopted dogs that Alyssa rescued:

“Birdie has & continues to be fearful of humans. She also takes time to warm up to any other animal. One vet described her as depressed. Her diet has gotten better but at the beginning she would not eat anything other than chicken. Birdie has had fleas since I adopted her.

She was given IV fluids along with other treatments through IV @ her first visit with Sumner Veterinary Clinic. She has been taking oral medication for fleas along with eye & ear treatments.

Her temperament has been hard to watch because she’s scared of everything. Anytime I need to take her somewhere I must physically pick her up & carry her because she’s scared to go anywhere with me. It’s been 15 days & she’s still scared of me & humans in general. I will reach out to Sumner Veterinary & Edgewood Veterinary & ask them to please speak with officer Pollard because these animals don’t deserve what they’ve been through.

I helped with grooming each of the dogs bought from the puppy mill and also took one of the goldendoodles in. It was heartbreaking to see the condition each of the dogs were in.

They were all crawling in fleas and terrified. They all seemed too skinny for their age and were vomiting. Their stools had newspaper and puppy pads in them. You can tell they came from very rough conditions.“

“Taking care of my dog, Gracie, she was very scared of humans. She would cower each time we walked into the room. She had little to not appetite and would throw up after she did eat anything. Luckily I already have another dog that she has become attached to and he has taught her a lot. She can now go up and down stairs. Will eat a meal and then some and has come to trust us. It took about 2 weeks for her to finally feel safe and able to run around the back yard like a regular puppy. I was able to care for my dog for a week before I could get her seen by a vet. She had infections in her ears and a hernia on her belly. Had I been able to take her in sooner I think her blood test results would’ve read worse.”

Possible Animal Cruelty Charges?

Alyssa filed her complaint about the condition of the dogs she rescued to Officer Pollard at the end of September. Officer Pollard told me that after conducting an investigation into the complaint she submitted a report recommending charges against Ms. Oaksmith for animal cruelty.

Officer Pollard said that she submitted the report “through (her) chain of command.” If approved, her report will then go to the Grays County Prosecutor Norma Tillotson. She will determine whether or not to file criminal charged against Ms. Oaksmith.

Grays Harbor Prosecutor Last Hope for Prosecuting Breeder

Sadly, Ms. Tillotson is the last hope for the abused dogs on Ms. Oaksmith’s property.

The WSDA and the County Health Officer won’t take action because their focus is on human health; they don’t care if Ms. Oaksmith is selling unhealthy puppies full of parasites because it doesn’t threaten human public health.

Animal Control can’t cite Ms. Oaksmith for having too many dogs because Washington’s weak breeder regulations allow her to have as many dogs as she wants as long as she has 50 or fewer dogs with intact sexual organs.

Animal Control Officer Pollard says that despite the number of complaints about Ms. Oaksmith she has found no evidence to charge her with animal cruelty until Alyssa filed her complaint last fall.

Due to Washington’s lax enforcement of its already weak animal cruelty and breeder laws, unscrupulous backyard breeders have operated with virtual impunity for years.

However, no one can look at the pictures/videos of Oliver and not believe he suffered terrible abuse.
And the fact that Ms. Oaksmith had people sign statements that they wouldn’t sue her if the dogs died proves she knew dogs were in distress and desperately needed medical care.

Ms. Oaksmith’s abuse of these dogs was no aberration or one time occurrence. It was consistent, systematic and cruel. She chose to deny these dogs medical care and chose to let them suffer.

I’ll say it again: SHE CHOSE TO LET THEM SUFFER.

I urge Ms. Tillotson to hold Ms. Oaksmith accountable for her horrific abuse of these dogs, charge her with animal cruelty, and prohibit her from selling/owning dogs anymore.

If Ms. Oaksmith gets yet another pass for her abuse of dogs, it will show, for all intents and purposes, that Washington’s laws to protect dogs from backyard breeders are worthless.

Share This!

The post Will Grays Harbor County Finally Take Action Against Backyard Breeder? appeared first on Seattle DogSpot.

Successful Spay/Neuter Policies Create High Demand for Rescue Dogs in Washington

Over the last couple of decades, the number of rescues sending dogs from Southern states to the Pacific Northwest has increased significantly.

The reason for this phenomenon is simple. Municipal shelters and private rescues in the NW developed stricter spay/neuter policies and devoted resources to educate people about the importance of spaying/neutering their pets. As a result, shelters and rescues have fewer dogs available for adoption.

For example, in the Seattle area:

• King County (KCC 11.04.400) stipulates that, with a few exceptions, “No person shall own or harbor any cat or dog over the age of six months that has not been spayed or neutered.”
• The Seattle Animal Shelter spays/neuters dogs before they are put up for adoption. It also offers low cost spay/neuter surgeries to the public.
• Private rescues like The NOAH Center, Homeward Pet Adoption Center, Seattle Humane Society, and the Humane Society for Tacoma and Pierce County also offer low cost spay/neuter surgeries to the public.

Increased focus on spaying/neutering have been so successful in reducing the stray dog population that shelters in the PNW often don’t have enough dogs to meet the public demand for rescue dogs.

To meet this demand, a number of rescues began transporting dogs from overcrowded shelters (primarily in southern states) to PNW shelters. They also import dogs from countries like Mexico that have few spay/neuter laws and huge populations of stay dogs roaming the streets.

That’s why the Washington State Department of Agriculture labeled Washington a “magnet state” for rescue dogs from other states and countries.

I don’t have a problem with rescues bringing dogs from other areas to Washington for adoption as long as they follow state and federal rules designed to protect the dogs’ health and prevent the spread of disease.

Rescue Groups Cannot Bring Puppies Under 6 Months Old in to US

Casa Dog, a rescue based in Puyallup, is one of the groups that bring dogs into Washington for adoption. Its website says it brings dogs here from California and Mexico.

Recently, someone alerted me that Casa Dog is violating federal law by importing dogs under 6 months of age from Mexico to the US.

The Animal Welfare Act is a federal law that “establishes requirements concerning the transportation, sale, and handling of certain animals and includes restrictions on the importation of live dogs for purposes of resale, prohibitions on animal fighting ventures, and provisions intended to prevent the theft of personal pets.”

Here are the elements of the Animal Welfare Act that rescues must follow when they bring dogs to sell into the US from other countries:

Majority of Puppies from Mexico Listed by Casa Dog are Underage

Currently, Casa Dog’s Petfinder page lists 60 puppies available for adoption: 39 of them are from Mexico and under 6 months old. It lists several underage puppies on its Facebook page as well.

I sent a couple of emails to Casa Dog asking how the rescue can bring puppies that young into the US and whether or not it has some special arrangement with the USDA to import them. The rescue never responded.

Without a response from Casa Dog I can only speculate how the rescue brought so many puppies across the border in violation of the Animal Welfare Act.

One possibility is that the federal officials tasked with overseeing the importation of animals aren’t checking the ages of the puppies at the border because they are inept, indifferent, or overworked.

Another possibility is that Casa Dog has people bringing the puppies across the border who mislead border agents by claiming the puppies are their personal pets.

Some rescues do this because the requirements for bringing personal dogs into the US are much less stringent than those for dogs brought into the US by rescue for rescue.

All you have to do to bring a personal dog into the US from Mexico is a health certificate signed by a certified Mexican vet stating the dog is healthy. The dog doesn’t even need to have a rabies vaccination if the “owner” provides an oral or written declaration that it “has lived in Mexico for the last 6 months, or since birth.”

Puppy Import Rules Less Stringent for Dog Owners Than Dog Rescues

Given the numerous requirements that rescues must meet before they can bring dogs into the US from Mexico for resale, it’s easy to understand why some unscrupulous rescues have people claim puppies are their own personal pets at the border.

It can also be extremely profitable.

Rescue puppies are always in high demand by potential adopters. People adopt them much more quickly than adults, so they generate cash faster than older dogs. And because they get adopted quickly, rescues don’t have to spend as much on their food and medical care.

As I said, I can only speculate why/how Casa Dog is bringing underage puppies across the Mexican border to sell in Washington since no one responded to my emails. But based on the ages of multiple puppies from Mexico it appears the rescue is violating the Animal Welfare Act.

Furthermore, by avoiding the more stringent rules for vaccinating dogs brought into the US from Mexico for resell, Casa Dog could be importing puppies that could either spread diseases or be more susceptible to them.

If you want to adopt a puppy from Mexico or other countries, please remember that unless it’s at least 6 months old, the rescue selling it may have brought it into the US illegally.

And if you know of a rescue that is selling underage puppies from Mexico, fill out and send this form to the US Department of Agriculture.

Share This!

The post Puyallup Dog Rescue Importing Underage Puppies from Mexico appeared first on Seattle DogSpot.

WARNING: THIS POST CONTAINS DISTURBING CONTENT, PICTURES, AND VIDEO

Last Saturday in Olympia, Jane* and her family left their home to run an errand. They returned 30 minutes later to a “horrific” scene of blood and carnage in their goat pen.

Inside the pen were 4 dogs “covered in their goats’ blood.” After rushing her children into the house so they wouldn’t see the slaughter she discovered that 2 of the goats were already dead and 3 others were “barely hanging on.”

She told me, “You could hear the goats screaming in pain and terror even from inside my house.”

* = All names of people in this post have been changed to protect them from retaliation.

Rogue Dog “Rescue” Has Long History of Causing Chaos

The four dogs that killed the goats escaped from Sharon Gold’s house in Olympia. She’s a neighbor of the goats’ owners.

Sharon Gold owns Furever Homes rescue. Over the last few years she has had dozens of run-ins with Thurston County Police and Joint Animal Services in Lacey because of the haphazard and dangerous way she runs the rescue as well as her refusal to follow local laws/ordinances.

I’ve written about Gold’s antics for several years now. She runs her rescue as a money making enterprise. She doesn’t give a damn about helping dogs. To her, they are disposable commodities she uses to put cash in her pocket.

Here are some examples of how she operates her “rescue”:

From 2010 – 2017 Gold and Furever Homes were the subject of over 100 incident reports/complaints filled with Joint Animal Services in Lacey.

In 2016 she harassed a military family who told me some of the puppies they fostered for her had died due to several medical problems including tapeworm. She hassled the woman who fostered the puppies so much a judge issued a restraining order against her.

In 2017, 18 dogs at Furever Homes died in a kennel fire.

Joint Animal Services banned her from its facility after she and her son threatened to kill an animal control officer.

You can find a links to all my posts about Sharon Gold and Furever Homes at the end of this story.

Olympia Family Returns to Find “Horrific Bloodbath”

Here’s Jane’s account of what happened. I made edits for punctuation and clarity.

“There are 9 houses in my neighborhood and 8 of us have all had more than one run in with Sharon or her son.  In fact, a week or two prior to all this, I took her husky home to her after she was terrorizing my goats. The next day Sharon came down to my house looking for her dogs AGAIN. After leaving my house she got into it with my other neighbor where cops were involved.
 
The day of the tragic events, my family and I left for 30 mins to run to the store. We were not prepared to come back to the horrific scene that was unfolding on our property. From our slider door we could see a dog in our goat pen drinking water. My husband and I instantly ran outside to discover that actually 4 dogs were in our pen.

At that point the dogs were done attacking our goats and acting like nothing had even happened even though they were all covered in our goats’ blood. As we got closer, we could see our littlest goat was dead. I instantly stopped in my tracks and just couldn’t bear to go any further to see who was left.

My husband immediately called 911 because after the events the prior week, we were informed to call the police when her dogs were out and to avoid contact with Sharon. At that point my young kids were coming outside on our patio, so I had to race up there to shield them from the horrific bloodbath while he continued into the goat pen.

Once I got inside, I frantically called my neighbor Jack so he could help my husband. I know there is absolutely no way he understood the words coming out of my mouth because I was sobbing but he dashed out his back door and jumped right in to help.

I quickly learned that another one of the goats was also already dead and that 3 were barely hanging on. You could hear the goats screaming in pain and terror even from inside my house. So I instantly tried to get a hold of the only vet near me that dealt with livestock. Unfortunately it was so late in the day that I could not find anyone to help us while my 3 remaining goats were suffering.

Luckily, we finally found a vet 45 mins to an hour away but was willing to make the trek to help us. From the house I could see one of my goats come out of their house and she was panicking. The whole time the pack of dogs were laying down at the lower part of my goat pen until they saw my goat panic and instantly were ready to attack again.”

But this time my husband, Jack, and another neighbor were down there to protect the remaining goats who could barely move and fend for themselves. The goat who panicked actually ended up collapsing and dying at that moment. That same goat was the same one that was guarding one of my smaller goats inside their house and trying to protect him.

It was clear that it was all a game to these dogs and had nothing to do with them killing to eat. They were just doing it as a vicious attack. Once my dad arrived to help me with the kids, I instantly ran down to help try to save the last 2 remaining goats.

I can’t even express to you how traumatizing it was to see my 3 dead goats just lying there. My goats were more like dogs to me than livestock. They were my babies and very much a part of our family. But I didn’t have time to let emotions overrun me because I had a goat actively trying to die and was screaming for me. We all were doing anything we could possibly think of to help save the remaining 2 goats until the vet could get there.

The first sheriff to arrive on scene wanted to get the owner (Gold) to come get the dogs out of the pen. We declined to allow the owner on our property because there was no way we were going to let her just be able to just take her dogs back like nothing happened. So, they hung out with us while we waited for the vet and allowed us to take the dogs to joint animal services.

Once the vet arrived and assessed the goat that I was mending to I had to make the gut-wrenching decision to have him euthanized because even once sedated he could not calm down and was clearly dying and in so much pain and had lost so much blood. We then began working on the last goat that was in bad shape but had been protected some from my other bigger goat.

During that time the dogs were being loaded up and taken to joint animal services but two of them definitely started acting aggressively to people. Once my last goat got stitched up, we then had to take care of the carnage that was left by these dogs. It was heartbreaking to say the least. Absolutely devastating! My one remaining goat is still fighting for his life and it is still touch and go.

The worst part is he keeps calling out for his herd and you can just see the confusion and sadness in his eyes. My family is hurting. My husband and I can’t even look at the empty goat pen without crying. My kids are beyond sad that they lost their goat friends. 

Unfortunately we know this nightmare isn’t over and Sharon will probably only begin to harass us more as we pursue justice for our lost babies.”

In a follow up email, Jane explained to me how Gold, her family, and their dogs have changed their once peaceful neighborhood to the point that people don’t even feel safe going outside and kids are worried that Gold’s dogs will attack them:

“I have 2 young kids I don’t feel safe having out in front yard in case they get out which is at least once a week. Another neighbor has a disabled son who he worries about being attacked, and we all have dogs that we are worried about coming in contact with her aggressive dogs even though our dogs are on our property.

I know at least one neighbor has been bitten. The people who live right next to her didn’t even feel like they could have an Easter egg hunt because the dogs charge the fence and dig their way out underneath, and they were afraid the kids would get attacked.

You try to confront Sharon and you either get lied to or it turns into a heated situation. She is impossible to deal with and there is never any remorse. And her son is an absolute lose cannon. Once you cross his mom, you become a target to him for getting the bird or threatened.”

Sharon Gold and Her Family Terrorize Neighborhood

Another neighbor wrote this about Sharon Gold:

“Sharon has no remorse and has trained her children, especially her son to follow in her crazy footsteps.  She attacks anyone that questions her and is just a horrible person.  For months the neighbors have been returning her dogs and asking her to get it under control. 

About a week before the goat tragedy, one of our neighbors texted her husband, Justin, a picture of her dog in our back yard and warned of something bad like this happening.  Sharon came down to confront him in an altercation that led to the Sheriff showing up, Sharon making acquisitions that the neighbor threated to kill her and she was scared for her life.  She was so scared that she continued to stand on his property for 30-45 minutes until the sheriff arrived…. 

In that time her son ran down full sprint and confronted this neighbor in his own garage for threatening his mom. We went from living in a peaceful neighborhood to a shit show. 

The police have been her multiple times to handle situations involving them or to serve them.  To say this is a nightmare is an understatement.”

Another neighbor sent me this message:

“It has been nothing but trauma the last few months. The dogs are always getting out (i’m talking 2-3 x week) you can here dogs barking all night. The garage sounds like there are 50 small animals in there. The big ones are kept out back. We have tried to reason, text justin whenever they do get out, he says they are not his. Police have been out twice in the last 10 days.”

Sharon Gold’s inability or unwillingness to control the dogs has turned the lives of the families in the other 8 houses in that neighborhood into a nightmare. Her dogs are killing animals, biting neighbors, and petrifying children.

If anyone dares to try and hold her accountable the damage her dogs cause she screams at them and accuses them of lying. Furthermore, as I noted earlier, she threatened to kill an animal control officer and was served with a restraining order after she harassed someone who fostered puppies for her. And she has never taken any responsibility for the damage her recklessness has caused.

The bottom line is that Gold and her family are terrorizing the other 8 families in that neighborhood.

Thurston County Officials Not Protecting Citizens

Sharon Gold is well-known in both the Thurston County Police Department and Joint Animal Services. They have fielded dozens of complaints and visited her homes multiple times over the last decade. Her dogs have attacked other animals and bitten people. She has repeatedly violated county ordinances regulating how many dogs she can have. She has shown no respect for law enforcement, animal control, or her neighbors.

So why is she still raking in the cash selling dogs and ignoring local ordinances?

Why haven’t Thurston County officials held her accountable for terrorizing her neighbors and running an illegal business out of her home? It’s not clear if she’s continuing to run the “rescue” as Furever Homes or under a new name, but regardless, what she’s doing is ruining this neighborhood.

Why aren’t they concerned that they have constituents that are too scared to go outside in their own neighborhood?

And why haven’t elected officials taken measures to shut down this illegal, out of control rescue?

I plan to monitor what actions the Thurston County Sheriff’s Office, Joint Animal Services, and the Thurston County City Council do/don’t take to address to horrible, untenable situation.

Here are links to the articles I’ve written about Sharon Gold and Furever Homes rescue.

Adopt-a-Pet Boots Furever Homes Rescue from Its Website (August 2018)

Furever Homes Founder Banned from Joint Animal Services After Threats Against Staff (March 2017)

Furever Homes Dog Rescue Continued to Lose Dogs in 2016 (February 2017)

Candlelight Vigil to Be Held in Olympia Sunday for 18 Dogs That Died in Furever Homes Rescue Fire (January 2017)

Fire Kills 18 Dogs at Furever Homes Dog Rescue Near Tumwater (January 2017)

Vigil in Olympia Remembers 18 Dogs That Died in Fire at Illegal Dog Kennel (January 2017)

Furever Homes Dog Rescue: 100+ cases with Thurston County Animal Control since 2010 (July 2017)

After 3+ months, Furever Homes Dog Rescue Still Has Too Many Dogs (June 2016)

Judge Issues Restraining Order Against Furever Homes Rescue Director Sharon Gold (March 2016)

Furever Homes Rescue Makes Military Family’s Fostering Experience a Nightmare (February 2016)

Furever Homes Rescue is Operating in Violation of Thurston County Codes (February 2016)

Furever Homes Rescue Illegally Brought Puppies from Mexico into Washington (February 2016)

Share This!

The post Dogs from Furever Homes Rescue Kill Neighbor’s Goats in Olympia appeared first on Seattle DogSpot.

DOG Could Spur Demand for Belgian Malinois

Don’t do it.

Don’t go the movie DOG and allow yourself to be so enamored of the Belgian Malinois that stars in it that you rush out and impulsively buy one.

If you haven’t heard of this movie, which opens on today, here’s the plot summary from Movie Insider:

“DOG is a buddy comedy that follows the misadventures of two former Army Rangers paired against their will on the road trip of a lifetime. Army Ranger Briggs (Channing Tatum) and Lulu (a Belgian Malinois dog) buckle into a 1984 Ford Bronco and race down the Pacific Coast in hopes of making it to a fellow soldier’s funeral on time. Along the way, they’ll drive each other completely crazy, break a small handful of law/s, narrowly evade death, and learn to let down their guards in order to have a fighting chance of finding happiness.”

Not the most original plot in the world, but really, almost any movie with a cute dog (is there any other kind?) that leads its human(s) into wacky, funny, unexpected situations is virtually guaranteed to attract large audiences and make lots of money.

Whenever a purebred dog stars in a popular movie, people become so enamored with the breed they immediately want one for themselves.

Unfortunately, they often think that when they adopt one of these dogs it will instinctively exhibit the same cute, funny, and engaging behavior they see on screen.

What they don’t realize is that someone spent months, or even years patiently training the dog to learn that cute, funny and engaging behavior.

Dog Movies Create Demand for Breeds

Here’s what usually happens when a movie features a dog breed:

1. People want a dog like the one they saw in a movie
2. Demand for the breed skyrockets
3. Backyard breeders meet the demand by producing as many puppies as possible as quickly as possible
4.
People snap up the puppies without understanding the breed’s behavior or the time commitment it will take train their dog properly
5. People unprepared to handle the breed dump the dogs in shelters
6. Shelters fill up with the breed
7. Dogs dumped at shelters are euthanized or end up with other people who aren’t equipped to handle the breed

A good example of this cycle is the increase in demand for Dalmatians created by the movie 101 Dalmatians.

When Disney re-released in 1985 and 1991, demand for the breed increased exoponentially.

During that timeframe, “the annual number of Dalmatian puppies registered by the American Kennel Club (AKC) skyrocketed from only 8,170 animals to a staggering 42,816.”

But when the people who adopted these puppies realized how difficult it is to train Dalmatians and how much exercise they required, they dumped them in shelters in droves.

And a year after the movie’s live action release in 1995, a shelter in Boulder, CO experienced “a 301% increase in their Dalmatian population, and another in Tampa Bay, Florida, had an alarming surge of 762%.”

In addition, the shelters said that, due to improper care dogs’ temperament was “aggressive, stubborn, and high-strung with little hope for improving their behavior.” Shelters usually consider dogs with these traits unadoptable and often euthanize them.

Also, because backyard breeders just care about money and not maintaining the integrity of a breed, many of the dogs they mass produce have physical problems and/or exhibit atypical, dangerous behavior.

Belgian Malinois Too Much for Average Person to Handle

Belgian Malinois are driven, focused, loyal, intense and highly intelligent working dogs. Originally bred as herding dogs, these dogs are often used by the police and the military due to their intense focus and work ethic.

This breed takes its role as guardian/protector extremely seriously.

Consequently, these dogs require a significant amount of training and socialization “to ensure that they understand appropriate behaviors and don’t become overly wary of and a danger towards people they don’t know.”

Furthermore, their playfulness and strong prey drive “can make them an inadvertent risk to young children or small pets.”

The level of training these dogs require to harness their energy and protective instincts is far beyond the ability of the average dog owner. They also need a significant amount of daily exercise and mental stimulation.

That’s why anyone that adopts a Belgian Malinois must either have extensive experience training the breed or work closely with an experienced trainer.

A poorly trained Labrador Retriever may excitedly jump on a visitor or counter surf for food when your back is turned.

An untrained, unsocialized, and unfocused Belgian Malinois can be aggressive and destructive. They also have a tendancy to bite “if they are scared, bored, restless, or don’t have any job to do.”

And a bored Belgian Malinois without a job will make one for themselves. Like tearing your house apart or destroy your furniture.

This video shows what these high energy, intelligent dogs can do when properly trained. After you watch you’ll understand the difficulty an average dog owner will have when he/she tries to train one.

When they do bite, Belgian Malinois can cause extensive damage due to their strong jaws and a tendency to bite and hold.

It’s no coincidence that their nickname is Maligator.

Just Don’t Do It

A properly trained and socialized Belgian Malinois can make an excellent family pet; HOWEVER, you should not get one if:

• you’re looking for a laid back couch potato you can leave at home unattended for hours every day.
• you don’t have experience training this breed and don’t want to work for hours with an experienced trainer.
• you are unable/unwilling to spend many hours training, socializing, and providing it with mental stimulation.

If you do go see the movie, the three Belgian Malinois that play Lulu will impress and entertain you. But when you’re on the way home and the thought of buying one inevitably creeps into your mind,

DON’T DO IT.

This video shows some of the challenges of working with Belgian Malinois on the set of DOG.

Share This!

The post Do NOT Adopt a Belgian Malinois After Watching DOG appeared first on Seattle DogSpot.

Main Street Mutt Rescue Has Sketchy History

A Bellingham dog rescue reneged on its approval for a woman to adopt a puppy after she asked questions about the group’s vaccination and health protocols.

Main Street Mutt Rescue is the organization that cut off communication with the woman who insisted on knowing the rescue’s procedures before she adopted a puppy.

This isn’t the first time I’ve heard about Main Street Mutt Rescue’s sketchy vaccination practices. In 2015 I wrote that the rescue adopted out unvaccinated dogs that weren’t spayed/neutered.”

In my post I wrote that a woman adopted a 7-week-old puppy from Main Street Mutt Rescue that hadn’t been vaccinated or dewormed.

The rescue’s founder Amy Millman also placed an unneutered adult dog w/out an adoption contract, health certificate, or proof of vaccination.

I wrote that if Ms. Millman didn’t accept help and change her procedures, she “should get out of dog rescue because she is either unable or unwilling to prioritize what is in the best interest of the dogs she says she’s trying to help.”

Apparently she never took my advice.

(Note: Amy Millman never responded to the questions I sent her about this incident.)

Email Lays Out Potential Adopter’s Concerns

Last month a woman sent me the following email regarding the article I wrote about Main Street Mutt Rescue in 2015:

“I found Main Street Mutt rescue on Petfinder when I was looking for a puppy to adopt. I found an adorable litter of pittie mixes and I was overjoyed. After my application was approved I was looking up the shelter to show my friends the litter when I noticed the mediocre rating on Google reviews. After many of the reviews stated having troubles with vaccines and other health issues I started to get more nervous.

I did some more research and found this article as well as complaint filed to the better business bureau. The BBB claim stated that the dog had preexisting medical conditions that were not mentioned and they would like a refund, and as far as I am aware the issue was not resolved by MSMR.

Because I still had my heart set on these adorable pups I decided to address my concerns to Amy and the foster parent directly. The specific issues I raised were whether there would be some record of the vaccinations administered, how they were administered, and whether they had been checked by a vet.

The foster parent was as helpful as I believe they could be and said that to their knowledge the puppies had not been to a vet, that the vaccines as well as the microchip would be administered at the time of adoption (by whom was not specified, but I assume the foster parent or Amy herself), and that they would be dewormed at 6 and 8 weeks. They also said I would receive a voucher for the neuter/spay. They even sent me a photo of the vaccines which was the “Nobivac Canine 1-DAPPv”.

(I am not a vet so take what I say next with a grain of salt, but from what I read certain vaccines are not recognized unless administered by a vet.)

Amy was MUCH less helpful in my opinion. She simply said that she has no idea why there would be negative reviews and that I would get “a document stating what they were given and when”. As far as any of my concerns, they were not addressed and when I continued to press I was promptly told that I could no longer adopt the puppy because “they got too many applications and miscounted”. This was AFTER I was confirmed to adopt one of the 3 remaining puppies in the litter.”

Potential Adopter Makes Questions Clear from Outset

Here are the texts between the potential adopter and the person fostering the puppies.

Several statements from Main Street Mutt Rescue in this text thread about its vaccine protocols raised red flags for the potential adopter. You’ll also see several misleading statements regarding the rescue’s general health protocols.

Having done her research about Main Street Mutt Rescue, the potential adopter said from the outset she wanted clarification about the rescue’s vaccination and neutering policies.

This answer is not accurate.

Most veterinarians don’t consider vaccinations valid unless a veterinarian or licensed vet technician (LVT) administered them.

Furthermore, you can’t get get a health certificate for your dog unless a veterinarian or LVT vaccinated it.

Airlines won’t allow your dog to fly without a valid health certificate. Most dog boarding and dog daycare facilities won’t take dogs that don’t have valid health certificates and/or vaccinations.

And saying vets “should” accept vaccinations administered by a rescue means nothing. It’s just a statement to falsely assure potential adopters that the vaccinations the rescue gave are valid.

The reality is, regardless of what anyone thinks, if your dog isn’t vaccinated by a veterinarian or LVT, you cannot get a health certificate for it. Period.

Like I said, it’s true that you have to get a clean bill of health (ie, a health certificate) from your vet if you want to fly with your dog, but you can’t get one until a veterinarian or LVT vaccinates your dog.

The potential adopter said she’ll adopt the puppy when she gets clarification regarding Main Street Mutt Rescue’s vaccination policy.

The puppies’ foster tells the potential adopter that Amy Millman approved the adoption.

I’ll address the statement in the 2nd red box first.

Most rescues don’t vaccinate their dogs at adoption events. The larger ones, like Seattle Humane Society, have their own licensed veterinarian(s) on staff that vaccinate their dogs. Smaller rescues usually have their dogs vaccinated during vet exams.

In addition, it usually takes “ten to fourteen days” before a vaccine provides reasonable level of protection. If a rescue vaccinates a puppy/dog the day someone adopts it the vaccine may not provide adequate protection for several days.

Furthermore, bringing an unvaccinated puppy to an adoption event could expose it to dangerous viruses that vaccines given the same day may not prevent.

Finally, dogs sometimes have adverse, life-threatening reactions to vaccinations that require immediate medical treatment.

If the dog vaccinated at an adoption event has a severe reaction at the event or on the drive home it could die before it gets medical treatment.

Reputable rescues have their dogs and puppies vaccinated before an adoption event to ensure they have a minimal level of protection. They can also get medical attention immediately if the dogs have an adverse reaction to the vaccination.

Regarding microchips, the American Veterinary Medical Association, says “microchips should really be implanted under supervision by a veterinarian, because veterinarians know where the microchips should be placed, know how to place them, and know how to recognize the signs of a problem and treat one if it occurs.”

And you should note that in this text the potential adopter says for the third time in 24 hours that she wants to know Main Street Mutt Rescue’s vaccination protocols.

The potential adopter asks a some new questions. Has a vet examined the puppies? Are the puppies being dewormed?

While it’s true that reputable breeders have a veterinarian certify the health of their puppies, reputable rescues have all their puppies/dogs checked out by a vet before adoption to ensure they’re healthy.

Main Street Mutt Rescue’s website even says part of the adoption fee covers vet visits.

I think it’s unconscionable that a rescue would adopt out puppies or dogs without a vet exam.

And the foster’s statement about deworming is problematic. At the time of this text exchange the puppies were about 6 weeks old and hadn’t been dewormed yet.

Puppies should be dewormed when they’re 2 weeks old and then every 2 weeks until they’re 12 weeks old. These puppies should have been dewormed 3 times when the potential adopter asked if they’d been wormed yet.

Not long after the potential adopter said she wanted some assurance that the puppy wouldn’t have any pre-existing health problems, the foster told her the adoption wasn’t going to “work out” because they “miscounted” the adoption applications.

Potential Adopter Dumped the Same Day She Expressed Concerns to Director

The potential adopter also had a brief text exchange with Amy Millman in which she raised the same concerns she expressed to the woman fostering the puppies:

The potential adopter made her vaccination/health concerns clear to Ms. Millman. She also specifically asked if veterinarians, airlines, etc. would accept the vaccinations.

Ms. Millman responded somewhat defensively that she didn’t know what issue there could be with vaccines even though she had to be aware about the complaints about the rescue’s vaccination procedures since 2015.

She also failed to note that veterinarians and airlines wouldn’t consider vaccinations valid if the rescue vaccinated the puppies.

Ms. Millman stopped communicating with the potential adopter after she asked if a vet would exam the puppies before the adoption. That same day, the foster told the potential adopter that the puppies were no longer available for adoption.

Simple Questions Help Identify Bad Dog Rescues

A few years ago I wrote a blog post called, “10 Questions That Can Identify Fake Dog Rescues.” In it I say that the first thing you should do before adopting a dog from a rescue is conduct an internet search on the rescue and its founder.

If anyone has written bad reviews about their experience with the group you should find it in seconds.

The potential adopter’s internet search for Main Street Mutt Rescue turned up complaints about its vaccination and health protocols.

Here are comments from people who adopted dogs from Main Street Mutt Rescue that raised her concern about the rescue:

“Any animal “RESCUE” facility whos adoption fees go up 200$ based off the cutness of an animal is straight trash. I get trying to make money but 1000$ to rescue a puppy….. Your trash….. We already have to get 1000 $ worth of stuff and new pet rental fees etc… And saying it’s to ensure financial responsibility is A lie, just like the “vaccinations” you provide that aren’t administered by a professional (or accepted by airlines, etc).” 5 months ago

“I adopted a puppy from this business through a foster family. I’m very happy with my new pup but things are tough going. Firstly, the $450 adoption fee claims to cover vaccinations… Except those vaccines aren’t administered by a licensed vet, so any organization (e.g. airlines, behavior schools, dog boarders), won’t recognize them. So even if puppy actually was vaccinated, we had to repeat the shots regardless. As well, Main Street Mutt Rescue has no phone number because apparently it’s a business from the nineteenth century. As well, they’ve not responded to any of my emails or questions about puppy. (EDIT: they eventually did, and even got us in touch with the families who adopted the siblings of our pup, so we could all cross-reference health stuff.)

So through some veterinary investigation, we found that she has giardia, demodectic mange, kennel cough, and an abdominal infection resulting from some type of insect bite. We were told that the kennel cough and the bite infection could very possibly have been from after adoption, but the giardia definitely predated that. Mange is a little more complicated, so it’s difficult to lay the blame at the mutt rescue, but their startling unprofessionalism, lack of communication, and opacity in presentation are all kind of red flags that we should have noticed.

I would advise folks who are looking to rescue to go elsewhere. There are plenty of shelter dogs and puppies around Whatcom that need adoption and their shelters will continue to provide clear communication after adoption and they actually administer vaccines properly. I am happy with my mangy puppy, and every puppy is a lot of work, but there’s clearly something missing in how this place conducts business.” a year ago

Note that the dog had some health problems that a vet should have identified and treated before adoption.

Reputable Dog Rescues Welcome Your Questions

The potential adopter’s discovery of these complaints led her to ask 3 questions listed in my post:

Can I see this dog’s health certificate?
Has this dog had a comprehensive health exam?
Is the dog up to date on its vaccines?

Reputable dog rescues with nothing to hide are happy to answer questions from potential adopters. It shows they take adopting a dog seriously. It also shows they understand the commitment and responsibility that comes with adopting a dog.

Most sketchy rescues, however, will cut off communication with an adopter who asks lots of questions.

How this woman conducted her search for a puppy to adopt is a textbook example of why it’s critical to carefully research any potential dog rescue and ask questions about any concerns you may have before you make a commitment to adopt a dog.

She ended up adopting a puppy from the Seattle Humane Society. Here’s how she described her experience to me:

“As far as Seattle Humane I asked them all the same questions, and they answered all of them without fail. The pup was 9 weeks when I got him and he had a full vet exam and had a sheet with his vaccinations listed. Overall, a much better experience! “

I want to emphasize that the vast majority of dog rescues in Washington are run by people dedicated to saving dogs from euthanization and finding them homes where they will thrive.

Asking some pointed questions helps you identify the dog rescues you should avoid. These questions can also help you find reputable dog rescues that will help you find a fantastic companion.

Share This!

The post Main Street Mutt Rescue Dumps Woman After She Asks Questions appeared first on Seattle DogSpot.

Note: Ginger Luke, the Founder of Ginger’s Pet Rescue, passed away on September 22, 2021. Our condolences go out to her friends and family.

Massive Salary Increase

Recently I discovered that Ginger’s Pet Rescue in Seattle paid its founder Ginger Luke $138,312 in 2019 and $163,801 in 2020. The payments were astronomically higher than her salary for the previous few years.

I found this information on the publicly available tax forms the rescue submits to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

Here’s how much the rescue paid Ms. Luke from 2015 – 2020:

2015 $5200
2016 $35,600
2017 $18,900
2018 $19,200
2019 $138,312
2020 $163,801

From 2018 to 2019, her salary increased by 620%. It went up more than 18% the following year.

That’s quite an increase.

I don’t think we should expect people take a vow of poverty to run a charity, regardless of whether or not it saves animals, protects the environment, or helps impoverished families.

But their CEO salaries shouldn’t be excessive. They should be based on what similarly sized charities in the region doing the same work pay their CEOs.

And because charities are public organizations, the process for determining how much they pay their top employees should be transparent. In fact, as I note later, the IRS insists on it.

Salary Out of Line With Other Seattle Area Animal Rescues

To make a fair assessment of the increase in Ms. Luke’s salary, I Iooked at the salaries for the top executives at the Seattle Humane Society in Bellevue, Homeward Pet Adoption Center in Woodinville, The NOAH Center in Stanwood, and the Humane Society for Tacoma/Pierce County in Tacoma from 2015-2020.

I then checked the groups’ revenue to get an idea of the size of the organizations. I also looked at the percentage of average revenue their CEOs’ salaries represented.

This information came from the groups’ 990s, which are financial statements they must to submit to the IRS annually. Some of the groups hadn’t turned in their 990s for 2020 to the IRS yet so I didn’t have their information for that year.

Since her salary for 2019 and 2020 was such an outlier compared to 2015-2018, I averaged the data for those 2 years and compared it to the averages of the other groups for 2015-2019/2020.*

Ms. Luke’s average salary for 2019-2020 represented more than 15% of the rescue’s average revenue during the same period. That’s a significantly higher percentage than any of the major Seattle area rescues I examined.

Homeward Pet Adoption Center had the next highest percentage of average CEO salary to average organizational revenue at only 4.5%.

Ginger’s Pet Rescue paid Ms. Luke more than 3 times that percentage even though Homeward Pets averaged more than twice as much revenue.

Even more astonishing is the percentage of revenue Ginger’s Pet Rescue paid Ms. Luke compared to the percentage the Seattle Humane Society paid its CEO.

Ms. Luke made $151,057, which was 15.7% of the rescue’s average revenue. Seattle Humane’s CEO made $162,297, which was only 1.3% of its average revenue.

Another way to look at it is that for every dollar in revenue contributed to Ginger’s Pet Rescue, more than 15 cents went to Ms. Luke’s salary; only about a penny of each dollar raised by the Seattle Humane Society went to its CEO’s salary.

And although Seattle Humane’s average revenue was more than 12 times higher than that of Ginger’s Pet Rescue ($12.4 million vs. $970,933), Ms. Luke’s average salary was almost the same as that of Seattle Humane’s CEO ($151,057 vs. $162,197).

Any way you compare the numbers, Ginger’s Pet Rescue paid its CEO a significantly higher percentage of its average revenue in 2019-2020 compared to much larger pet rescues in the Seattle area.

Incomplete Tax Forms

The IRS is the federal agency that determines whether or not an organization can be classified as a 501(c)(3) charity. Charitable organizations are exempt from paying taxes and contributions to them are tax deductible.

The IRS has no specific rules regarding how much a charity can pay its CEO; however, its Compliance Guide for 501(c)(3) Public Charities states that:

“A public charity is prohibited from allowing more than an insubstantial accrual of private benefit to individuals or organizations. This restriction is to ensure that a tax-exempt organization serves a public interest, not a private one. If a private benefit is more than incidental, it could jeopardize the organization’s tax-exempt status.”

The guide goes on to say specifically that no part of an organization’s net earnings “may inure to the benefit of an insider.” It defines an insider as “a person who has a personal or private interest in the activities of the organization such as an officer, director, or a key employee.”

So according to the IRS, Ms. Luke was an insider at the time of the excess salary payments because she was an officer, a director, and a key employee.

The IRS notes that an example of a prohibited inurement includes “payment of unreasonable compensation to an insider.”

Because of the dramatic increase in Ms. Luke’s salary in 2019 and 2020, and because the percentage of her salary compared to the rescue’s revenue was 3-12 times higher than that of other CEOs who ran organizations much larger than Ginger’s Pet Rescue, I believe Ms. Luke’s salary during that period was a prohibited inurement as defined by the IRS.

No Explanation for Salary Increase

In addition to paying unreasonable compensation to an insider, Ginger’s Pet Rescue failed to acknowledge paying that compensation to Ms. Luke on its Form 990s sent to the IRS.

The instructions for Part VI, Section B, Line 15 of the IRS Form 990 state that if an organization “didn’t compensate its CEO, executive director, or top management official during the tax year, answer “No” to line 15a.”

On its tax forms for 2019 and 2020, the rescue checked the “no” box. This told the IRS that it didn’t compensate Ginger Luke even though it noted in another section of the forms that it paid her over $300,000 during that period.

The IRS requires charities that do pay their CEO, Executive Director, or top management official provide documentation showing that “the process for determining compensation…that included the following elements”:

• Review and approval by a governing body or compensation committee, provided that persons with a conflict of interest regarding the compensation arrangement at issue weren’t involved.

• Use of data as to comparable compensation for similarly qualified persons in functionally comparable positions at similarly situated organizations.

• Contemporaneous documentation and recordkeeping for deliberations and decisions regarding the compensation arrangement.

The rescue’s tax forms indicated it had no process for determining and approving Ginger Luke’s compensation during that time period.

The IRS wants charities to show how they determine CEO’s salaries to ensure that a tax-exempt organization serves a public interest, not a private one.

If a charity provides an excessive private benefit, it could jeopardize the organization’s tax-exempt status.

Paying a CEO an excessive salary does not serve the public interest because it takes money away whatever an organization does to serve the public.

Ginger’s Pet Rescue’s stated mission is “to give homeless animals with no hope the life they deserve through rescue, foster, and adoption.”

The excessive salary the rescue paid Ginger Luke meant it had fewer funds to achieve this mission.

The Seattle Humane Society’s tax forms show how charities should report and justify their CEO’s salary.

Ginger’s Pet Rescue Won’t Answer My Question About Salary Increase

Ginger’s Pet Rescue’s lack of transparency regarding the money it paid to Ms. Luke isn’t just limited to the tax forms it sent to the IRS.

When I first noticed the huge salary increases the organization paid to Ms. Luke I asked why it paid her so much in 2019 and 2020. I also asked who took her place and how much they made.

Here’s the entire conversation I had with someone from the rescue on Facebook:

11/11/21, 7:58 am

You sent

Hi – This is Robert Pregulman from Seattle DogSpot. First, I’m so sorry that Ginger passed away earlier this year. Please accept my condolences for your loss.

You sent

I’m contacting you because I noticed on your 990s that you sent to the IRS that Ginger was paid $138,312 in salary for 2019 and $163,801 in 2020. That was significantly higher than she was paid in past years. It’s also much higher than the salary of directors of much larger animal rescues. Can you please tell me why you paid her so much during 2019 and 2020? Also, can you tell me who took her place and how much they make? Thank you.

11/11/21, 5:55 pm

Ginger’s Pet Rescue

I’m not sure why this concerns you ?

Ginger’s Pet Rescue

It’s also much lower than lots of animal rescues . I’m not sure why it’s a problem who gets paid what ? Do you have any idea the commitment level and how many hours and days a week it takes to run GPR and also the sacrifices rescuers make

11/12/21, 7:16 am

You sent

I do understand the level of commitment it take to run a rescue but I think it’s fair question to ask what prompted the decision to raise her salary by over $100k. And her salary is more than director’s at other rescues that raise more money. Also, no other rescue pays their directors a salary that is such a large percentage of their budget.

You sent

Can you tell me what prompter the organization to give her such a large salary increase?

You sent

prompted

11/16/21, 9:54 am

You sent

Could someone from the board contact me to explain the dramatic salary increase for Ginger for the last years?

11/19/21, 10:04 am

You sent

Just wanted to check again to see if someone from the board could contact me about the salary increase.

Whomever responded to my questions basically told me the reason for the massive salary increase was none of my business. He/she wouldn’t tell me who replaced Ginger and how much they made either.

I repeated my request 3 more times over the next few days but received no other response.

Charities Must Be Transparent to IRS and the Public

Ginger’s Pet Rescue may have had a perfectly justifiable and defendable reason for Ms. Luke’s large salary increase. But its dismissive response to my question and lack of transparency on its tax forms doesn’t engender confidence in the process (if there was one) it used to approve the increase.

Organizations designated as charities by the IRS don’t have to pay taxes so they have more money available to use for the charitable purposes for which they were created. Also, it’s easier for them to raise money because donor contributions are tax deductible.

In return for these entitlements, none of their earnings may provide an excessive benefit to any employee or board member. They must also explain to the IRS their processes for determining these payments.

This ensures that resources aren’t diverted from an organization’s charitable purposes and into the pocket of an individual.

I’m not saying Ginger’s Pet Rescue did anything illegal by significantly increasing Ms. Luke’s salary. But the rescue does have an obligation to provide documentation to the IRS showing the process it used to justify the increase to ensure it wasn’t a substantial accrual of a private benefit or an unreasonable payment to Ms. Luke.

I will continue to investigate the reason for Ms. Luke’s salary increase and will let you know if I ever get an explanation for it.

Here is all the data I collected regarding CEO Salary, Yearly Revenue, and CEO Salary % of Income for the largest pet rescue groups in the Seattle area.

Share This!

The post Ginger’s Pet Rescue Paid Founder Over $300,000 in 2019 & 2020 appeared first on Seattle DogSpot.

Have you seen those crowdfunding websites for animal rescues that have proliferated on social media? Every day I see a couple of dozen fundraising requests from rescues that need money for unanticipated emergencies like a dog that needs immediate life-saving surgery or expensive treatments for viruses like parvo and distemper.

These crowdfunding sites are an incredibly valuable tool for smaller rescues that don’t have tons of money. It allows them to quickly collect contributions from hundreds of donors to save dogs in emergency situations.

Unfortunately, some rescues post funding requests that are at best misleading and at worst fraudulent.

Washington Animal Rescue Falsely Claims It’s in California

Recently someone alerted me to a questionable fundraising request for $4000 by Horn Creek Rescue in Fiddletown, CA on Cuddly, a crowdfunding site for animal rescues.

The funding appeal appeared on Cuddly on August 20. It said the rescue needed to evacuate and find temporary boarding for its animals from the rapidly spreading Caldor wildfire.

The rescue said it had “multiple animals in their care; not just cats and dogs but pigs, hogs, chickens, goats, and birds.” 

That sounds legit, right?

But upon further investigation, I found a small problem with this fundraising appeal – there is no Horn Creek Rescue in Fiddletown, CA.

Horn Creek Rescue does exist, but not in California. The website opencorporates shows that the organization was incorporated in February 2019. It’s located at 35413 37th Avenue S in Roy, WA, not Fiddletown, CA.

Two Animal Rescues Registered at Same Washington Address

Coincidentally, another animal rescue is incorporated at that exact address: Purrsons United for the Rescue, Rehabilitation, and Relocation of Animals (PURRR).

I’ve written about PURRR several times over the last few years.

I first heard about PURRR and its owner Diana VanDusen in an article in the Tacoma News Tribune in early 2015 entitled, “The dog rescuer: Lakewood woman faces criticism for adopting out dangerous animals.”

Here are some of my posts about PURRR:

Dog Adopted from PURRR Rescue Mauled 6-Year-Old in 2013 (January 2015)

Why is PURRR Rescue keeping 20+ dogs outside in tents during Washington’s rainy winter? (February 2015)

Another Dog Adopted from PURRR Rescue Kills a Cat (March 2015)

Dogs from PURRR Rescue Still Live Outside in Kennels (December 2017)

Horn Animal Rescue isn’t just located at Diana VanDusen’s address. She is also on the group’s Board of Directors.

Animals in Fundraising Pictures Are From Different Rescue

Horn Creek’s fundraising appeal has several pictures of farm animals that apparently had been evacuated or needed to be evacuated to escape the fire. You’ll find no pictures of these animals on Horn Creek Rescue’s Facebook page. In fact, you won’t find ANY pictures of farm animals there.

So whose animals are in the pictures on Horn Creek Rescue’s fundraising appeal?

Eventually I found the pictures on the Facebook page of an animal sanctuary in Volcano, CA called Kevin Petunia and Friends Hog Heaven. Volcano is about 10 miles from Fiddletown. I can’t give you the link because the page blocked me soon after I “liked” it on Facebook.

I posted more pictures from Horn Creek’s Cuddly fundraiser with corresponding pictures from Kevin Petunia and Friends at the end of this post.

Horn Creek Rescue and Animal Sanctuary Connected

Kevin Petunia and Friends doesn’t appear to have any active presence on social media other than a Facebook page. It doesn’t have a website, it isn’t registered in California, and it isn’t recognized as a 501c3 charity by the IRS.

A woman named Dawna Scheda is the connection between Horn Creek Rescue and Kevin Petunia and Friends Hog Heaven. Along with Diana VanDusen, she is on the Board of Directors for Horn Creek Rescue.

Also, some of the fundraising appeals for Kevin Petunia and Friends listed Ms. Scheda’s email as a contact. And bills for medical treatment and supplies on the group’s Facebook page show Ms. Scheda as the contact for the group.

The most obvious connection between Ms. Scheda and Kevin Petunia and Friends are the pictures of her husband Steve on the group’s Facebook page. He clearly does a lot of work on behalf of the rescue, so it’s reasonable to assume that both he and Ms. Scheda run it.

Both Ms. Scheda and Diana VanDusen personally solicited donations to Horn Creek Rescue on Facebook.

In case you’re confused trying to follow what I’ve detailed, here’s a summary:

1. In late August Horn Creek Rescue posted a fundraising appeal on Cuddly for $4000 to help move animals out of the path of a California wildfire.
2. The appeal claimed Horn Creek Rescue is based in Fiddletown, CA, but it’s actually located in Roy, WA at the same address as the animal rescue PURRR.
3. Diane VanDusen, who runs PURRR, is on the Board of Horn Creek Rescue.
4. The pictures of the animals on Horn Creek Rescue’s fundraising appeal were actually taken at a place called Kevin Petunia and Friends Hog Heaven.
5. Horn Creek Rescue’s Facebook page has no pictures of animals other than dogs and cats. I found no records showing that it saves farm animals.
6. Dawna Scheda is also on the Board of Horn Creek Rescue. Posts on Facebook list her as a fundraising contact for Kevin Petunia and Friends, and the groups vet/supplies bills list her as a contact as well.
7. It appears Ms. Scheda and her husband Steve run Kevin Petunia and Friends.

Fraudulent Fundraising Appeal?

Based on the evidence I’ve found, I think Horn Creek Rescue posted a fraudulent fundraising appeal on Cuddly.

Horn Creek has no facility in California, it used pictures from animals at another organization (Kevin Petunia and Friends) in its funding request, and at least one of its board members is closely connected that group.

At this point I still have several unanswered questions:

Why would Diana Van Dusen create another rescue (Horn Creek) based at the same address of her other rescue (PURRR) that has virtually the same mission?

Why did the funding appeal on Cuddly claim Horn Creek had to evacuate animals from a nonexistent facility in Fiddletown, CA?

Did Horn Creek Rescue give the money from the funding appeal to Kevin Petunia and Friends? If not, where did it go?

Why did the funding appeal for Horn Creek contain pictures of animals from Kevin Petunia and Friends Hog Heaven?

I hope Cuddly investigates this funding appeal.

I have no reason to doubt that Cuddly is a legitimate funding platform that provides critical financial resources for small animal rescues; but the organization should take quick action to ban rescues that try to raise money using demonstrably false information.

Here are more pictures from Horn Creek Rescue’s fundraising appeal on Cuddly paired with the identical pictures on Kevin Petunia and Friends Hog Heaven Facebook page. The pictures on the fundraiser are obviously misleading because Horn Creek Rescue has no facility in California.

Horn Creek misled potential donors by using pictures of animals from another rescue to claim it needed money to move the animals away from the fire.

Share This!

The post Washington Animal Rescue Posts Questionable Fundraising Request appeared first on Seattle DogSpot.

A Texas dog rescue caused a distemper outbreak in the Northwest after sending 2 transports of dogs that had been exposed to the deadly virus.

Darby and Gracy’s Dog Rescue in Sherwood, OR had to euthanize 17 dogs and puppies last month sent from the SPCA of Brazoria County outside Houston, TX after 2 of the dogs sent on a July transport tested positive for distemper.

An Oregon women had to euthanize one of the dogs from SPCA of Brazoria County she adopted from Darby and Gracy’s after it developed distemper. She also had to put down her rescue dog after it contracted distemper from the new dog she adopted.

A dog from SPCA of Brazoria County adopted by another Oregon woman died from distemper on August 22. A dog adopted by a Seattle women developed distemper but fortunately it survived.

And a dog rescue in the Midwest had to euthanize 1 dog it got from SPCA of Brazoria County in July as well as 1 puppy already at the shelter it infected.

In total, 23 dogs sent to rescues in July from SPCA of Brazoria County either died from distemper or were so sick they had to be euthanized.

Canine Distemper: Highly Contagious, No Cure

Canine distemper is “a…..serious disease caused by a virus that attacks the respiratory, gastrointestinal, and nervous systems of puppies and dogs.” 

It spreads through airborne exposure, direct contact with an infected animal, or indirect contact (exposure to bowls, blankets, etc. used by an infected animal).

Canine distemper has an incubation period of 1-2 weeks but it can be as long as 4-5 weeks before an infected dog shows symptoms of the disease.

A dog can carry the virus for weeks without showing any symptoms and still infect other dogs.

Puppies are particularly susceptible because their immune systems aren’t fully developed.

Symptoms of distemper include:

• fever
• watery discharge from the nose and eyes
• coughing
• lethargy
• diarrhea
• lack of appetite

The virus attacks the nervous system as it progresses. This causes circling behavior, head tilting, seizures, muscle twitching, paralysis, and thickening of foot pads.

The virus is especially nasty because it’s extremely contagious, often fatal, and does not have a cure. 

Once a dog is either exposed to or has distemper, it must be isolated to prevent the virus from spreading.

After recovering from distemper a dog can still shed the virus for up to 120 days.

The American Veterinary Medical Association says treatment usually consists of “supportive care and efforts to prevent secondary infections; control vomiting, diarrhea and neurologic symptoms; and combat dehydration through administration of fluids.”

Distemper Vaccine Doesn’t Immediately Provide Puppies Full Immunization

An important concept to remember is that vaccination and immunization aren’t the same thing. That’s why giving a puppy a distemper vaccination doesn’t automatically give it full protection from the virus.

Puppies don’t have immunity from distemper and other viruses when they are born. Maternal antibodies provide the immunity puppies need, but their effectiveness gradually declines until puppies are approximately 12 weeks old.

Because the amount of maternal antibodies a puppy receives is variable, no one can predict when they no longer protect a puppy from viruses. Because of this, most vets give puppies their first distemper vaccination when they are 6-8 weeks old.

Vaccines given before that are less likely to be effective because “the maternally derived antibodies can block the pup’s ability to respond to vaccination.”

Puppies aren’t fully protected from distemper until about a week after their final vaccination when they are 16-18 weeks old. After that, “most pups have enough vaccine protection against the common vaccinatable conditions of dogs to ……. go to the dog park, doggie daycare, and other places where large groups of unknown dogs frequent and congregate.”

Veterinarians advise people to keep vaccinated puppies away from dogs with unknown vaccination histories until a week after their final vaccine.

SPCA of Brazoria County Not Fully Transparent About Distemper Outbreak

Distemper can overrun a shelter/rescue regardless of its protocols. Even those that take all possible precautions to prevent distemper can have outbreaks.

What shelters can control is how they respond to a distemper outbreak. One of the most important things they can do is to be completely transparent with the public.

As soon a shelter knows it has a dog with or exposed to distemper, it should immediately alert every adopter and rescue that took dogs from its facility that could have been exposed to the virus.

At the same time it should also make an announcement alerting the public about distemper at its facility and the steps it will take to address it.

SPCA of Brazoria County did make a public announcement on September 9 on its Facebook page about the distemper outbreak at its facility:

But SPCA of Brazoria County wasn’t fully transparent about its distemper outbreak.

The shelter knew on August 5 that a dog on the July 18 transport had distemper, but staff waited 4 more days before making the announcement on the rescue’s Facebook page. This is the text they sent that day to the Oregon woman whose puppy eventually died of distemper in late August.

Some Rescues Not Notified About Distemper Outbreak

In its August 9 announcement on Facebook, SPCA of Brazoria County said it would contact “persons associated with the animals at the shelter for the past few weeks to ensure that individuals would be on the lookout for the next few weeks for signs of the illness and take appropriate actions.”

However, over 2 months later, I know of at least 3 rescues that took dogs from SPCA of Brazoria County in July that still haven’t been notified about its distemper outbreak.

The 2 transports that took the dogs to D&G Dog Rescue also had dozens of other dogs that went to other rescues. So did the transport that delivered the dog with distemper to the shelter in the midwest.

We don’t know if SPCA of Brazoria County notified any of these unknown rescues that their dogs had been exposed to distemper.

Proper Health Protocols Not Followed

Based on information I’ve collected, I don’t believe SPCA of Brazoria County took the proper precautions to protect the health of dogs on the transports to Oregon while distemper ran rampant in several Texas animal shelters.

Dogs from Texas on First Transport That Arrived in Vancouver, WA on July 18

Wishbone (now Pepe) – 4.5 month old Terrier mix
Chevy – 4 month old Bloodhound
Reba – 4 month old Schnauzer/Doodle mix
7 Catahoula Puppies (almost 8 weeks old)

Dogs from Texas on Second Transport That Arrived in Sherwood, OR on July 30

Biloxi – 1 year old Pittie with 11 puppies (3 weeks old)
Dolly – 1.5 year old Shepherd mix with 3 puppies (8 weeks old)
Pepe – 3 year old Beagle/Lab mix (vet said he was a senior)
Veteran – 2 year old Terrier mix
Winston – 4 month old Malinois

Transports Had Multiple Dogs from Different Shelters

SPCA of Brazoria County assured Shannon Rowe from D&G Dog Rescue that only dogs from its facility would be on the July transports. But Shannon later learned that the transports actually included several of dogs from other rescues. D&G had no idea where those dogs came from or if they were healthy.

The transport with dogs sent to the midwest rescue also had dogs from multiple shelters.

Given that several Texas shelters have had distemper outbreaks this year, shipping dogs from different shelters on the same transport increased the chance of their exposure to distemper, other communicable viruses, and parasites.

Almost All the Puppies Didn’t Have Full Immunity from Distemper

As I noted earlier, puppies aren’t fully protected from distemper until about a week after their fourth and final vaccination when they’re 16-18 weeks old.

Until then, puppies shouldn’t be around dogs with unknown vaccination histories.

Both transports for D&G had puppies with dogs from shelters other than SPCA of Brazoria County. Both transports also had puppies that weren’t fully vaccinated for distemper.

• Reba, a 4 month old puppy, had 1 vaccination 11 days before the transport left Texas and 1 the day it left
• Chevy, a 4 month old puppy, had 1 vaccination 11 days before the transport left Texas
• Wishbone, a 4.5 month old puppy had 1 vaccination 9 days before the transport left Texas
• All 11 of Biloxi’s 3 week old puppies were too young to be vaccinated
• All 3 of Dolly’s 8 week old puppies had 1 vaccination 15 days before the transport left Texas and 1 the day it left
• The 8 week old Catahoula puppies had 1 distemper vaccination 14 days before the transport left for Texas

The only puppy on either transport that had its full set of distemper vaccinations was 4 month old Winston. He never developed distemper and is doing well with his new family.

Dogs and Puppies Had Health Problems Upon Arrival

Virtually all the dogs and puppies from SPCA of Brazoria County had health problems when the transports arrived. Sick dogs are more susceptible to viruses like distemper and should not be on transports.

Dogs on July 18 Transport

• Chevy was coughing and had both a runny nose and diarrhea.
• Wishbone and Chevy had severe cases of coccidia.
• Wishbone was lethargic, coughing, and sneezing.
• All the Catahoula puppies had giardia and coccidia.

Dogs on July 30 Transport

Shannon from D&G Dog Rescue said virtually all the dogs on this transport looked sick when they arrived.

• Dolly had a cough
• 2 of Dolly’s puppies had white gums, crusty eyes, and were lethargic.
• 2 of Dolly’s puppies were diagnosed with“massive” heart murmurs.
• 1 of Dolly’s puppies had to have 2 emergency fluid injections.
• Biloxi was extremely thin.
• Some of Biloxi’s puppies had coughing, and several of the puppies had crusty eyes.
• D&G’s vet said Biloxi and all her puppies “had every possible parasite” and “the highest levels of coccidia he had ever seen.”
• Pepe had a cough, a clear runny nose, and 6 rotten teeth. The vet said he was about 8 years old, not 3 as SPCA of Brazoria County claimed.
• Veteran was “skin and bones” and would not eat.

All of these dogs and puppies didn’t magically develop their health problems while on the transport for just 2 days. At least some of them must have been visibly sick when SPCA of Brazoria County put them on the transports.

Reputable rescues ensure their dogs and puppies are healthy before they can be adopted. They don’t put dogs with worms and other health problems on transports and force adopters or rescues that take the dogs to pay their medical bills.

Furthermore, I don’t understand how a veterinarian could sign health certificates saying these dogs were in good health. This certificate is for Reba. The vet examined her the day before she left on the transport.

The vet signed the document saying that Reba was “free from infectious, contagious, and/or communicable disease.” Yet Reba’s medical history from SPCA of Brazoria County shows her positive fecal float on the same day the vet signed the health certificate.

Fecal floats are tests used to identify worms and parasites. A vet diagnosed Reba with hookworm soon after she arrived in Washington.

How could the vet SPCA of Brazoria County used say Reba had no infectious, contagious, and/or communicable diseases when she had a positive fecal float?

SPCA of Brazoria County Didn’t Follow Its Own Vaccine Protocols

In the section of the August 5 memo to Reba’s owner admitting a puppy on her transport tested positive for distemper, SPCA of Brazoria County stated its vaccination policy:

This is a reasonable vaccination policy. Vaccines every 2 weeks. A total of 4 rounds in puppies and adults. Boost vaccines 2 weeks later. All puppies on transports have age appropriate vaccinations.

Unfortunately, SPCA of Brazoria County didn’t appear to follow its own vaccination policy with many dogs on the July transports to D&G.

Puppies should have all their distemper vaccines by the time they are 16-18 months old. But of the 4 puppies in that age range on the first transport, only Winston was fully vaccinated.

Chevy and Wishbone only had 1 vaccination several days before they left Texas.

Reba only had 2 vaccinations. They gave her the second one the day they put her on the transport, so it wouldn’t provide her with full protection for another week.

The 8 week old Catahoula puppies had 1 vaccination 2 weeks before they left Texas. Fortunately they never developed distemper.

Biloxi’s puppies were too young to be vaccinated. Dolly’s puppies had 1 vaccination 15 days before they left Texas and 1 the day they left.

SPCA of Brazoria County noted in its September 9 Facebook announcement about the distemper outbreak that vaccinations don’t provide, “immediate or guaranteed immunity.” Yet it vaccinated Reba’s and and Biloxi’s puppies the day they left Texas even though the vaccinations wouldn’t provide full immunity during the 2 day trip.

Most Dogs from July Transports Did Not Survive

Almost all the dogs and puppies from Texas sent to Oregon and Washington in July either died or were euthanized. Dogs with blue names survived. Dogs with red names did not.

Reba – 4 month old Schnauzer/Doodle mix

Reba began showing distemper symptoms about a week after she was adopted. Because distemper symptoms are similar to those of other ailments, her vet didn’t treat her for distemper until August 5 when SPCA of Brazoria County sent her owner the email saying a puppy on Reba’s transport had distemper. Although the vet began treating Reba’s symptoms immediately, her condition continued to worsen, and she died on August 24.

Chevy – 4 month old Bloodhound mix

Chevy began showing distemper symptoms after she was adopted in late July. She also infected her adopter’s other dog. The adopter euthanized the dog Chevy infected on August 6 because she couldn’t stand or breathe well.

She put down Chevy the next day because she was suffering badly; she shook constantly and couldn’t eat or stand.

Wishbone (Now Pepe) – 4.5 month old Terrier mix

Pepe was lethargic, coughing, and sneezing when he arrived. The Seattle woman who adopted him took him to the vet as his health continued to decline. He eventually tested positive for distemper. Fortunately his treatment eventually alleviated his symptoms and he’s doing much better.

He still has some heatlh problems though. His owner told me, “The worst is his skin, with incessant itching, scratching, and bleeding as a result from the distemper.”

She also said he started “shrieking and yelping in pain” whenever she picked him up.

The radiologist told her he had a malformation on the back of his skull that pinches the nerves on the back of his neck, which caused the pain. She said this defect “was not documented anywhere on the “clean bill of health” from Brazoria County. The vet said “he was born with this and it would be a lifelong impairment.”

7 Catahoula Puppies – 8 weeks old

The puppies looked in good shape when their transport arrived and all were adopted. None of them have developed distemper so far. They all have had their 3rd vaccines and their adopters are still on watch for distemper symptoms.

Winston – 4 month old Malinois

As I said before, Winston was the only puppy from SPCA of Brazoria County on the July transports that was fully vaccinated. He never developed any health problems.

Biloxi – 1 year old Pittie with 11 puppies (3 weeks old)
Dolly – 1.5 year old Shepherd mix with 3 puppies (8 weeks old)
Pepe – 3 year old Beagle/Lab mix
Veteran – 2 year old Terrier mix

All of these dogs/puppies from the second transport were in horrible shape when they arrived in Oregon on June 30. Some of the puppies has white gums and crusty eyes. Some were coughing, lethargic, and full of parasites. 2 had “massive” heart murmurs.

The adult dogs had clear, runny noses and coughs. Some were extremely skinny.

D&G took them to the vet right away but he didn’t suspect they had distemper until August 5. That’s when Reba’s adopter told Shannon about SPCA of Brazoria County’s email saying a puppy on the transport tested positive for distemper.

None of these dogs were tested for distemper, but they had the classic symptoms and none of the treatments they received helped. Instead, their condition worsened daily. And remember they were all in terrible physical condition when they arrived in Oregon on July 30.

If D&G had them tested for distemper the dogs/puppies would have suffered for another week while the rescue waited for the results. And if they tested positive they still would have had little chance of survival.

D&G euthanized Veteran on August 6 because he had an upper respiratory infection, wouldn’t eat, wouldn’t stand, couldn’t stop shaking, and had a crusty nose.

On August 10, Shannon made the heartbreaking decision to euthanize Pepe, Dolly, Biloxi, and all the puppies because their health continued to deteriorate and they were suffering terribly.

Before deciding to euthanize them, she consulted with the veterinarian for the rescue. She then talked with the vet for her personal dogs who also consulted with the veterinarian for the state of Oregon.

All three veterinarians said that to protect the health and safety of the community it would be best to euthanize them.

Rescue’s Actions Turns People Against Adoption

SPCA of Brazoria County questionable vaccination procedures for the dogs on the 2 transports have ramifications beyond the deaths of almost 2 dozen dogs and puppies. Reba’s and Pepe’s adopters suffered both financially and psychologically.

Reba’s adopter spent over $6000 on her multiple vet bills. Now she has a huge debt on her credit card that will take years to pay off. SPCA of Brazoria County did refund the $500 adoption fee she paid but refused to pay any of Reba’s vet bills.

Wishbone’s adopter owes her vet over $1000 for treating his distemper. D&G refunded the adoption fee and paid for over $1000 of her medical bills

Both adopters told me that said their horrendous experiences with SPCA of Brazoria County will make them less likely to adopt a rescue dog in the future.

Reba’s adopter said, “it has made me very hesitant but I’m passionate about rescuing. I can’t say I’d jump into a transported dog again which is unfortunate because they need it the most. I’m passionate about rescue and additionally I couldn’t afford $2k on a breeder puppy. Isn’t that ironic?! I avoided it completely because I thought that was the riskier thing to do.

Every friend I know is now using my situation as a cautionary tale stating this is why they’ll only go to reputable breeders. I will still probably rescue but I’ve learned you really really have to do your research and ask a lot of questions. For now I’m just going to foster. Try to make something good from this mess.”

Pepe’s adopter told me, “This disease and the negligence of the shelter in Brazoria county has led to so much pain and sadness within our family. I have lost 10lbs from not eating due to stress and have been losing hair. We are also in credit card debt from taking him to the ER visit.

I can’t sleep at night because he still coughs and is restless from the itching. It has been very very hard. We worked so hard to build a home for a pup, and the negligence of Brazoria County SPCA had ruined that for us. We are optimistic for recovery, but aren’t sure we could ever do this again.”

Distemper Fiasco Forces Cut Backs for D&G Dog Rescue

Shannon from D&G Dog Rescue told me they ran up about $7000 in medical bills treating the sick dogs.

D&G will no longer rescue dogs outside the Northwest. She told me that, “The rescues from Texas are getting desperate and cutting corners and that is just going to bring diseases into the PNW.”

To its credit SPCA of Brazoria County did pay for the euthanizations. I believe it should also pay the vet bills for the dogs from the July transports.

The rescue admitted the dogs on the first transport tested positive for distemper, and it sent visibly unhealthy dogs on the second transport.

SPCA of Brazoria County had $1.8 million dollars in total assets at the end of 2020 according to the Form 990 it sent to the IRS. Paying the vet bills would have a minuscule financial impact on it.

SPCA of Brazoria County Facilitated Spread of Distemper

Distemper is an insidious virus; even the most meticulous, well-run dog rescues can have distemper outbreaks.

I don’t know what procedures SPCA of Brazoria County took to prevent a distemper outbreak at its facility; however, I believe it facilitated spread of distemper from its facility in Texas to the Northwest and Midwest by

• Waiting 4 days after learning a dog on the transport tested positive for distemper to alert the public about “a positive distemper results associated with the shelter population”
• Not telling every rescue/adopter that took dogs in July about the distemper outbreak at its facility
• Not properly vaccinating puppies it put on the July transports and sending them with dogs from other facilities
• Putting visibly sick dogs and dogs full of parasites on the July transports

I sent several questions to Brazoria County SPCA to get their side of the story but they said they couldn’t respond due to “potential ongoing legal proceedings.”

Share This!

The post Texas Dog Rescue Causes Distemper Outbreak in Northwest appeared first on Seattle DogSpot.

Current Conditions a “Perfect Storm” for Toxic Algae

KREM News reported last week that an official from the Washington State Department of Health warned that “extreme heat this summer and lower than normal water levels as causing a perfect storm for algae blooms across Washington.”

“Due to ongoing drought and warm temperatures in our state, lakes, rivers, and streams are under tremendous stress right now,” said Acting Washington State Department of Health Chief Science Officer Scott Lindquist, MD, “As a result, we are receiving reports of toxic algae blooms in areas we have not seen before.”

Currently, 10 waterways in Washington are closed to dogs and humans due to dangerously high levels of toxic algae.

Toxic Algae May Have Killed 3 Spokane Area Dogs

Toxic algae blooms could have caused the deaths of 3 dogs that swam in the Little Spokane River earlier this month according to the Washington State Department of Ecology.

The Washington State Department of Ecology found blue-green algae in samples taken from the Little Spokane River after the deaths of the three dogs.

A Department of Ecology spokesperson said the presence of blue-green algae does not give a clear answer about whether it was the cause of the dogs’ deaths but it doesn’t rule it out.

Colton Bridges told KREM news that the dogs “became severely sick and died” about 20 minutes after he brought the dogs to dry off.

“Christa took the son to bed and took the dogs inside to dry off for the night,” Bridges told KREM. “20 minutes later she goes into check on the dogs and all three of them are just laying right next to each other dead.”

The agency and Spokane Regional Health District are currently investigating other Spokane area water sources for toxic algae blooms.

Most dog owners haven’t heard of toxic algae blooms. I certainly hadn’t until I starting this website. But toxic algae is a huge threat to dogs during hot weather.

Warmer Weather, Increased Activity Cause Toxic Algae Blooms

Blue-green algae is present in Washington waterways throughout the year. It becomes toxic when warm weather and more activity in the lake stir up phosphorus sediments from the bottom of the lake and other nutrients that the algae feed on.

Toxic algae blooms don’t usually form in moving water, but the dry summer has reduced river flow in the state, according to the news release. This has created spots in rivers and streams that can be ideal for bloom formation.

Blue-green algae can produce two types of toxins are more common in Washington waters: microcystins and anatoxin-a.

Symptoms of Toxic Algae Poisoning in Dogs

Microcystins are a group of toxins that affect the liver. Because microcystins are the most commonly-found cyanobacterial toxins in water, they are the toxins most responsible for human and animal poisonings.

Dogs that ingest microcystins will show one or more of these symptoms:

• Weakness
• Lethargy
• Lack of appetite
• Vomiting
• Diarrhea (dark, tarry stool)
• Bleeding
• Pale gums
• Jaundice (yellow tint to gums and skin)
• Shock
• Seizures
• Collapse and coma
• Death

Anatoxin-a is a potent toxin that affects the nervous system. Symptoms include lethargy, muscle aches, confusion, memory impairment, and, at sufficiently high concentrations, death.

Dogs that ingest anatoxin-a will show one or more of these symptoms:

• Weakness or inability to walk
• Excessive salivation
• Excessive tearing
• Difficulty breathing
• Blue discoloration of skin and mucous membranes
• Tremors
• Seizures
• Muscle rigidity
• Paralysis
• Disorientation
• Coma
• Death

Dogs Are Particularly Susceptible to Toxic Algae Poisoning

A dog exposed to toxic algae can have respiratory paralysis which can kill it within 30 minutes from the start of these symptoms.

KREM reported that pet experts from Washington State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine say 60% of dogs who diagnosed with blue-green algae poisoning died from it.

Blue-green algae usually looks like blobs of floating scum or greenish streaks of oil-like substance in the water.

Dogs are particularly susceptible to toxic algae because they often drink the water they swim in and lick their fur after swimming.

“One of the things that’s important is if your dog gets into water that looks funny to you, some dogs are exposed by licking themselves. So if you see if they’re a funny color or have something on them, you will want to brush them off as fast as you can so they won’t groom the material off of them,” Dr. Beth Davidow from the Washington State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine told KREM.

You can monitor which Washington waterways have dangerous levels of toxic algae at the Department of Ecology’s Freshwater Algae Site. To look up specific waterways, check out the site’s database.

10 Washington Waterways Currently Closed Due to Dangerous Levels of Toxic Algae

Currently, these Washington lakes have high levels of toxic algae:

Anderson Lake – Jefferson County
Hicklin Lake – King County
Lacamas Lake – Clark County
Round Lake – Clark County
Lone Lake – Island County
Spanaway Lake – Pierce County
Palmer Lake – Pierce County
Roland Lakle – Klickitat County
Scootney Reservoir – Franklin County
Lake Lawrence – Thurston County

Your local jurisdiction may have more specific information about your lake. If you have questions contact Lizbeth Seebacher at Department of Ecology.

If a lake is not listed, it has not been tested for toxic algae through the Department of Ecology program.

Finally, remember that the Department of Ecology tests water quality in waterways on a rotating basis. This means that waterways within state recreation guidelines could develop hazardous levels of toxic algae before the state tests it again. That’s why it’s important to check for toxic algae blooms in any water before your dog dives in.

Share This!

The post Toxic Algae Blooms Appearing Across Washington Threaten Dogs and Humans appeared first on Seattle DogSpot.