True, but the definitions of what is abuse are vague, so unless the dogs are in obvious medical distress or a witness sees someone abusing a dog, authorities rarely prosecute anyone, including Sharon Gold.

There are laws in WA covering the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, applying to any person, whether or not they run so-called shelters. Animal Control in Thurston county need to investigate and charge her. See Section 2a below.

Chapter 16.52 RCW
PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
Section 16.52.207
Animal cruelty in the second degree—Penalty.

(1) A person is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree if, under circumstances not amounting to first degree animal cruelty, the person knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence inflicts unnecessary suffering or pain upon an animal.
(2) An owner of an animal is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree if, under circumstances not amounting to first degree animal cruelty, the owner knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence:
(a) Fails to provide the animal with necessary shelter, rest, sanitation, space, or medical attention and the animal suffers unnecessary or unjustifiable physical pain as a result of the failure;
(b) Under circumstances not amounting to animal cruelty in the second degree under (c) of this subsection, abandons the animal; or
(c) Abandons the animal and (i) as a result of being abandoned, the animal suffers bodily harm; or (ii) abandoning the animal creates an imminent and substantial risk that the animal will suffer substantial bodily harm.
(3) Animal cruelty in the second degree is a gross misdemeanor.
(4) In any prosecution of animal cruelty in the second degree under subsection (1) or (2)(a) of this section, it shall be an affirmative defense, if established by the defendant by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant’s failure was due to economic distress beyond the defendant’s control.
[ 2011 c 172 § 5; 2007 c 376 § 1; 2005 c 481 § 2; 1994 c 261 § 9.]

Thanks for alerting me to the typo. I certainly don’t want reputable dog rescues confused with Furever Homes.

Thank you for being so responsive 🙂

only problem is if they set a limit they can refuse to grandfather some people in. i’ve know individuals with 8 to 10 dogs living inside and their house is clean, dogs are in good condition, obedience trained, microchipped and with all vaccinations up to date. then there are people with only one dog chained out in the yard living in it’s own waste. if you’re referring to a rescue with too many dogs than i agree. they won’t do it because then they would have to take a good look at the puppy mills. now that would be good.

i’ve fostered for rescues and at the first sign of something wrong i was told to bring the animal to the vet asap. even on a transport, if the dog shows signs of illness they can be transported to the nearest vet or emergency vet. no reputable rescue would refuse vet care.

Jennifer, you need to change your reply to saying that some transporters do charge and some are free. there are more free transports than there are paid transports. it is the responsibility of the rescue sending the dogs to get health certificates and the responsibility of the transport coordinator to make sure the animals being transported have a health certificate before coordinating the transport and the transport driver to make sure all paperwork accompanies the animal. also TC transport coordinators are supposed to make sure a rescue is a reputable one before moving an animal.

I apologize for the mistakes. I went through the article and corrected them. Sorry for the inconvenience.