Brought Dangerous Dogs Brought from CA to WA
Over the weekend the Tacoma News Tribune ran story about a local dog rescue group accused of adopting out dangerous dogs brought to Washington from California.
The group, PURRR Rescue, was started as a cat rescue group but switched to dogs in 2004 after its founder died and Diana VanDusen took it over.
The Tribune noted that South Sound animal control officers have had several run-ins with VanDusen.
Last summer they dealt with “a series of deadly pet maulings last summer committed by dogs she had adopted out.”
PURRR brought the three dogs involved in the maulings from California.
The faster they adopt out the dogs, the faster they can bring up another load of dogs to sell.
Numerous Red Flags Raised
I don’t know whether PURRR does this or not; however, in my opinion, the Tribune article validates concern that some of the dogs PURRR is adopting out are dangerous. Furthermore, they make me question whether or not the organization is a viable, trustworthy dog rescue group.
Here are the things in the article that raised red flags for me:
Diana VanDusen with some of the approximately 3 dozen dogs she has at an undisclosed location in McKenna, WA. Photo by Drew Perine for the Tacoma News Tribune
1. Multiple jurisdictions and agencies have had problems with P.U.R.R.R.
The Humane Society for Tacoma and Pierce County and Metro Animal Services in Puyallup “won’t release animals to her.” Its director said “she’s in over her head.”
The City of Lakewood denied her business license application because allowing her to keep adopting out dogs could be “injurious to the public health, safety and welfare.”
A Lakewood Animal Control officer investigating one of the attacks last summer said VanDusen told him during his investigation that she’d had the dog “assessed by a dog trainer who determined the dog was adoptable.” But the trainer told him, “I never saw this dog.”
Tacoma Animal Control visited the property twice. The agency sent her a letter in October saying “she needed to license the animals.”
2. The families that adopted/fostered the 3 dogs involved in the maulings last summer all said Ms. VanDusen never told them the dogs were aggressive.
3. Ms. VanDusen told the Tribune that “she’s taken in more dogs than she can place.” She has about 37 dogs at a leased location in McKenna. Small rescues cannot properly care for that many dogs.
Even larger rescues rescues with tons of money, staff and volunteers don’t have that many dogs. The Seattle Humane Society currently has 22 dogs available for adoption on its website. Homeward Pet in Woodinville has 9. The Humane Society for Tacoma/Pierce County has 20.
4. She charges astronomical adoption fees. Most rescues and shelters charge $100-$300 and a bit more for puppies since they are in higher demand. P.U.R.R.R. charges $450 for an adult dog and $800 for a puppy, which is more than some breeders charge for a purebred puppy.
A well-run rescue or shelter doesn’t charge adoption fee anywhere close to those amounts. The Seattle Humane Society only charges $250-$275 for a puppy and $199 for an adult dog. The Seattle Animal Shelter charges $175-$210. NOAH charges $150 for dogs and $350 for puppies under 6 months.
5. She adopts out too many dogs to do adequate behavior/medical assessments on them. In the article Ms. VanDusen estimated she found homes for 500 dogs in 2013. That’s a little over 40 dogs a month. I don’t think one person operation could have time to assess the behavior and health of 40 dogs.
For comparison, the Seattle Animal Shelter, which has many more resources at its disposal, adopted out 507 dogs in 2012.
Patti Angeliz, the founder of Valhalla Rescue in Winlock, told me, “I can’t speak for every rescue, but it is standard policy in the veterinary world and our rescue to hold dogs for 7 to 10 days, in isolation, to ensure that they have no communicable diseases, such as parvo or distemper. We also use that time to ensure they do not have coccidia, giardia or any other parasites.”
She added, “claiming they make 500 adoptions annually is either highly exaggerated or they don’t do home or reference checks.”
6. She takes no responsibility for her dogs after they are adopted. Reputable rescues will take back their dogs if an adoption doesn’t work out. Last summer, she told the Tribune, “Once the dogs are adopted, they become the owner’s responsibility.”
7. A complaint filed by Peninsula Pet Lodge said the dogs Ms. Van Dusen sent to them showed signs of neglect like “emaciation, malnourishment and the need for flea and worm medication.” The company filed the suit to recover more than $7900 they claim Ms. VanDusen owes them.
Ms. VanDusen denies all the allegations against her. But the consistency of the allegations and the fact that they came from multiple sources should raise some concern.
Personally, I wouldn’t adopt a dog from them until all these problems addressed.
If you’re going to adopt a dog from a shelter or rescue check out my list of 10 things you can do to ensure you adopt a dog from a reputable rescue.
Seattle Humane may have only 22 dogs listed on its website but they care for nearly 4 times that amount. I should know; I volunteer at the shelter.
Thanks for the information and for volunteering at Seattle Humane. I think it confirms my point that one person can’t properly care for 37 dogs. According to Seattle Humane’s financial records it had $6 million in income during its 2014 fiscal year, which is more than 60 times the amount PRRR raised last year. Even if Seattle Humane is caring for 80 dogs, the amount it spends per dog is significantly higher than PRRRR.
I have seen this were people try to start drama because they are unhappy about an organization. I really dislike people like yourself “whoever wrote this”. For bringing down an organization that is helping animals on the edge of death.
I have visited this rescue once at an adoption event in lakewood, the staff was awesome, and the dogs were healthy, and waiting to find a new home. I also saw when you adopt a dog, you end up with a whole package. From what I remember, was a Bed, leash, collar, dog food, PUPPY CLASSES, I know there was more but hitting a blank. Thats a pretty great deal if you ask me! Gets you all set up to bring your new addition back home.
so honestly It just seems like you’re spewing bullshit lies, about a rescue, just because you might be angry or upset. Thats more dogs that are dying in kill shelters. So knock it off grow the fuck up and stop being an ignorant bitch, and help these animals live.
P.S Dogs are unpredictable animals. Thats also another problem with you people you think every dog should just be perfect.
Amen. I fully support everything you just said.
Here’s what I wrote on my FB page: 3 separate families said they were told the dogs were not aggressive. I wouldn’t trust the info if it only came from 1 person, but when the same complaint comes from 3 people involving 3 separate cases, it indicates a pattern. What motivation would they have to lie? I’ve written about the problems at the Olympic Animal “Sanctuary” for over a year, and despite numerous evidence showing the dogs were neglected, people constantly said its critics were lying, but offered no proof. Now that the dogs are free and have been examined by veterinarians and qualified behaviorists, we have irrefutable evidence those dogs were neglected. Just saying someone is lying doesn’t prove anything.
Also, I don’t think all dogs should be “perfect.” I have a dog with some behavioral issues. But a rescue group should be completely transparent about their dogs and so if a dog DOES have behavioral problems the potential adopter knows what they are.
Reputable rescues do background checks and home visits for potential adopters. They don’t just take the word of a potential adopter. If Ms. Van Dusen did home visits, she could determine whether or not the info on the applications was true. If she did do home visits, she didn’t do them very well.
The Tribune story has multiple sources. The group was kicked out of Lakewood. Tacoma Humane and the Puyallup shelter both won’t send dogs to her. 3 different people said they weren’t told the dogs were aggressive. Ms. Van Dusen said a trainer assessed one of the dogs mentioned in the article and said it was “adoptable” but the trainer said he never saw it and showed the report the list of dogs he’s worked with. That dog wasn’t on the list. Is everyone lying?
I’m not surprised supporters of the shelter and Ms. Van Dusen are calling all the accusations against PRRR lies. The same thing happened at the Olympic Animal “Sanctuary” in Forks. For months they tried to smear anyone that criticized them, yet they offered no proof that the 124 dogs inside their warehouse were treated humanely. The Sanctuary ended up being shut down and the dogs were taken in by various rescues that saw how the dogs had been abused. A vet that examined one of the dogs said it was the worst case of abuse he’d ever seen and the dog hadn’t eaten for 6-8 weeks. The article quoted multiple people from multiple source. Again I ask, are ALL of them lying? If so, where’s the proof?
First of all, the person who wrote this isn’t starting any drama. They saw an article that was very negative and worked on breaking it down into something more digestible. They summarized what was presented in the other article and explained what, from that article, stands out as huge red flags to them. It’s good information, and the person who wrote this article has a good head on their shoulders.
Dr. Lawerence… you are a doctor of what? You do not speak like an educated person, not with that potty mouth! Your beef should be with the Tacoma News Tribune not this web site if you think its all LIES.
Seattledogspot/Robert P. Thank you for continuing to be a shelter/rescue watchdog for the Pacific Northwest. This is an interesting story to me because of the fact this rescue is taking in pit bulls and large dogs from county shelters in California instead of pulling them from city shelters in Washington.
Shelters taking in dogs from out of state municipal shelters is happening all over the country. The transport route goes from the Mexican border all the way up to Canada on the west coast, up and down the east coast, and from the southwest to the midwest. I even talked to a shelter in California that takes in dogs from Mexico.
Most commonly rescues take in SMALL dogs from out of state because they are in shorter supply in their own state and they are much easier to adopt out and adopt out quickly. Pit bulls and other larger breed dogs fill up city shelters in Washington and are put to death every day. Why would a rescue need to go to California to get these dogs instead of their own back yard?
How about you write an article on how to help rescuers who have gone over their head. You seem to have the answers.
I don’t think they need an article. The first step is for the rescue to acknowledge it’s in over its head. Then it should stop taking in new dogs immediately and see if other rescues or shelters can take some of their dogs so they can reduce the number to a manageable level.
She needs to stop, and that’s it. She needs to stop saying “yes,” acknowledge it’s no longer in these animals’ best interest, and pull back from these activities until she can approach it in a more moderate, careful way. Here’s the article you want:
http://bestfriends.org/Resources/The-Overwhelmed-Caregiver-When-Helping-Gets-Out-Of-Hand/
Amen, Doris. Bridges not wedges. But it’s falling on deaf ears here.
Wow your article is horrible. The Humane Society is government funded. Private rescues are not so adoption fees are going to be higher to get a pet that’s fully vaccinated, including their rabies vaccination, microchip, spay/neuter, leash, collar, harness, bed, toys and flea treatment for a year. You add all that up and tell me you’d spent a lot less on all of that. The news reporter never even talked to those who have volunteered for the rescue or adopted a dog from them. It’s not a one man show, it’s full of volunteers who help with all the dogs and looking into applications. The adopters ARE told the dogs can be unpredictable since they’re a rescue and you don’t know what their past is, they ARE told to keep the dogs away from cats and other small animals since they are dogs and could potentially harm or kill them. And it possible to adopt out 500 dogs in a year when you partner with other rescues paying for all their dogs to get vetted so they won’t bring more homeless pets into the world and helping them adopt out their dogs. This is a rescue that actually cares for every cat, dog amd small animal they come across. That will do anything to save it (unlike the Humane Society). This is a rescue that will help you with food if you can’t afford to feed your animals, that will get flea treatment for all your pets if you have a flea problem and can’t afford to get the right medicine yourself. Paying for animals to get fixed so there’s no more accidental litters, paying for ferals with trap and release so the elderly aren’t choosing to feed themselves or the cats outside that didn’t choose to be homeless. You only see the negatives that people are bashing her for not the positives she’s doing for the community. Learn the truth before you try and post an article based off of lies, biased stories and maybe check your spelling too since you couldn’t even get the rescues name right.
The Seattle Humane Society is NOT government funded. Here’s a link to their financial reports. http://www.seattlehumane.org/files/images/Final_SHS_Financial_Statements_14.pdf
The financials don’t show any government funding. Most local humane societies are privately funded, so please get your facts straight. And a cursory check of the “private rescues” in our area will show you that most don’t charge more than $300 for any dog they adopt out. Yes, they spend more on the dogs than they get back in adoption fees, but their main goal is to get the dogs adopted, not to make money. And saying a rescue does some positive things doesn’t negate anything in the article.
Yes, this.
Rescues, just like private pet owners and shelters, can be overwhelmingly good or they can sometimes get in way over their heads and make some huge mistakes. It seems like this particular rescue has gotten in way over its head and made a lot of huge mistakes. I’m sure this lady’s heart is in the right place, but the damage she is doing to these animals, the perception of these breeds, to the families who aren’t made aware of a dog’s history and temperament, and to the public perception of rescues in general is TERRIBLE.
I have worked not I this group, but somewhere close. ( I will not release the name.) Diana does care for these animals, but just as the article said she is in way over her head. I have seen some very concerning things from this organization from non-medical diagnoses made by Van Dusen to scare a new puppy owner into surrendering get pet just to be resold for 1500$! It is not ok to tell a new pet owner that their puppy has hip pysplasia with no proof (which you can only get from x-rays) or doctor experience, just to get your hands on a pure bred pup to resell. Also proper screening should happen for these animals before they go to new homes and I know for a fact this does not happen with this shelter! Many of her cats have been diagnosed with lykemia after leaving days after leaving her group. Anyone who knows anything about this diseases know it is very contagious and if you own a pet with this condition it is vet recommended it be your only cat and indoor for life to prevent spead of disease. These are just a few of the
Things that go on behind closed doors just saying.
Thanks for your comment and insight.
I read this and it sounds like a personal vendetta instead of a logical, researched article. It makes me nauseous that rescues are put through the ringer so often by other “rescues” and people spouting off “Humane Society” like that brings any validity to these words.
First of all, ANY dog can become “dangerous” at any time due to a number of reasons -not limited to an unforeseen and unknown medical reason, such as a brain tumor or any number of injuries.
For this blog, article, whatever it is to claim that a rescue charges an excessive amount at those costs is also hilarious, come visit my area in Chicago and if you want to see a bad rescue take a look at the rescue in Northwest IN that has actually done horiffic things with animals, Paws Here Foundation.
It is also IMPOSSIBLE to know that an adopter has told all of the truths on an application, no matter how well you do your checks. It is human nature to tell half truths and cause problems instead of finding a way to help, but you apparently get that pretty well. Instead of writing such an infantil “I have my proverbial panties in a wad” article I suggest you “help” instead of hinder a rescue you may be surprised how positive things come from that. And as far as placing the Humane Society on such a high horse, how about you do some research on some of their issues and write that article, you could perhaps speak to Nathan Winograd, as he has done his research extensively and writes based on total factual information. Granted your local Humane Society may or may not need to be called out on the carpet, but in general what they represent is a little disheartening and perhaps you should reconsider what you write on others.
And as far as breeders and full bred puppies- the problem dogs that you discuss come from “breeders” in the first place and I’ve not seen one that sells a puppy for the prices you claim nor are they vetted. So the relevancy of that piece of info has me confused. Way to advertise for Adopt Don’t Shop (that was sarcasm by the way)
Also your lack of professionalism radiates as you feel the need to answer so many comments that are made. If you were confident in your claims and actually trusted your sources as being the “right” side you maybe you wouldn’t feel that need. The whole shame in it is that you have the desire to put a wedge instead of a bridge between entities that have perhaps the same goal in saving lives. You do that once again I stress by HELPING. Of course all of this is my personal opinion just like this article is based on yours and obviously some friends of yours.
Just as the price for most goods in services vary from state to state, so do the price of adoption fees. Even a cursory examination of fees in Western WA would have show you that the vast majority charge between $100-$300. That is standard in the NW. I don’t know what rescues in Chicago charge, but it’s irrelevant. I also understand that any dog can become dangerous. They doesn’t make the practice of adopting out dangerous dogs without fully informing the potential adopter about the dogs behaviors issues OK, nor does it make adopting out dogs without at least observing their behavior for a few days. And local Humane Society’s aren’t affiliated with the national HSUS. They are focused on rescuing and adopting dogs. They don’t get money from the national HS. Trying to tie local HS to HSUS is a just a smokescreen (buy the way, I didn’t realize the adopt don’t shop was a bad thing).
I know of rescues that read this article and offered to take some of the dogs at PURRR and were turned down flat. You can’t give help to someone that doesn’t want it.
And there you go, proving my point EXACTLY. ADOPT DON’T SHOP should be the only thing, obviously you didn’t get my sarcasm, so sorry. And don’t think because a Humane Society is local that they are all fantastic, they aren’t. But thanks for your attempt to educate. And let’s see what else you have to say. I would advise that the rescue hire an attorney, with all of your education it may be the appropriate thing to do. Again way to build bridges. You rock (sarcastic statement, fyi)
I don’t know about Humane Society shelters other than the ones here, and they do good work. But you’re not the first breeder to bash them. They have an excellent puppy mill campaign.
Informative article. Rescues need to be transparent and honest to potential adopters. Charging more than the standard $100.-$300. is selling dogs, not adopting them out. Like others have said, good rescues are not in it for the money, they are in it to re-home dogs to well matched family homes – which includes home visits, background checks, return-to-rescue guarantee if it is not working out, etc. Keep up the good work educating people with the truth, Robert.
Thank you – I’ve heard of very few people that paid that much from other WA rescues.
I agree with everything in this article except the adoption fees part. We have rescued many dogs from Cali and we charge $350-450 adoption fee per dog but we spend roughly $600 per dog for vetting, adequate boarding, vetting including (spay/neuter, deworming, health certs, heart worm tests, micro chipping (if not chipped at pound), flea and tick meds, grooming, antibiotics for KC, and all the required vaccines – DHPP, rabies and Bordatella). It costs on average $85 just to get the dogs from CA up to Seattle and that’s in addition to boarding the dog at $10 per day in Cali. If we didn’t charge $350-450 then we wouldn’t be able to save any dogs. I remember paying a $350 adoption fee for my dog many years before I was involved in rescue and I questioned the rescue as to why the adoption fee was high. They stated that charging those fees for the young healthy dogs helped cover the medical cost for the older and less adorable dogs. I was happy to pay it and that was for a 5-year-old dog. Now doing what I do, I want to know people won’t blink at a $400 adoption fee because I need to know they can afford the vet care costs in the future and all the required care for the dog. Small rescues don’t have a vet on staff or even vet techs. They have to pay regular vet costs and despite what people may think it’s hard almost impossible to get a rescue discount even in this wonderful city of Seattle.
Oops! I thought I was responding to the article that alerts you as to what to watch out for with rescues.
I do rescue work with a local AKC breed club which does rescue specific to our breed only. I have personally met Diana because we received a call from her about a dog she wanted to surrender to us because it was a purebred and she hoped the club could help her with evaluating the dog.
I called her, arranged a meeting to evaluate the dog in question, when I showed up she stated that if we wouldn’t take the dog she would be taking it to a local vet to be euthanized. Her story about the dog changed multiple times over the hour and from what she told our rescue coordinator. She had 6 dogs on-site and when I asked how many she had in her rescue she admitted that she had over 23. She said that she has a “soft spot” for dogs that have been accused of being dangerous or that have been hurt and wants to give them a chance. She admitted that at that time she was incurring boarding fees of more than $200 per day for dogs all across Pierce County and even had two boarding at JBLM under the name of a family that she recruited to “foster”. She said that she feels obligated to help everyone that calls her even though she may not have kennel space or foster homes. She told me the story a puppy that got out of the yard, was hit by a car, family couldn’t afford to pay for surgery at the vet but didn’t want it put down, she “rescued the dog”, paid for the surgery (showed me the $3,000 bill) and said that she gave the pup back to the people who surrendered it because she found out they wanted another dog. I told her that just because she is a “rescue” doesn’t mean she has to take every dog in that needs to be rescued. She should only take what she has room for and should be focusing on getting the ones she has adopted out before taking in more. She went on about how she was in over her head, overwhelmed and just didn’t see a way out because there are so many that need help or just someone to love them.
I spoke with a young couple who was fostering dogs for her and was able to glean from them that she focuses her adoption and foster family recruiting efforts through Craigslist, PetSmart (Lakewood) and targets young adults and young, military families. She sometimes pressured them into taking dogs they didn’t trust due to known behavior issues.
Before and after my interactions with Diana I did some online research and personally contacted several local pitbull, staffordshire terrier, and mixed breed rescue contacts here in Tacoma/Pierce County. As a result, I feel that although she has a soft spot for dogs in need, she is unqualified to do what she is doing on the scale she does, has good intentions but the day to day operations of running a rescue are more than what she can handle, and her reputation horrible and continuing to spiral downward as a result. She can’t say no and unfortunately dogs, cats (of which I had no idea she was “rescuing” too), and people are suffering. Many people rolled their eyes when I asked about her and a few referred to her as “crazy” and having “hoarding” tendencies but all said she is not qualified to be running a “rescue group” on her own. Unfortunately it will probably take a legal action to stop her.
Our club rescue coordinator and I feel a personal responsibility for every dog taken in to our rescue. When either one of us go out to evaluate a dog, first and foremost our my mind is what’s best for the dog, not me, not the rescue, nor the current owner. We try to find out what’s going on, why are they surrendering, is it a problem that is fixable. If we don’t have a foster family within our rescue group we say so up front and offer to have club members come work with them. Rescue people have to be willing to look at the whole issue objectively. Is this a dog that can be rehabilitated or placed in another home, do we have a foster who can handle the issues, are they issues that will take long term training or just someone who is a veteran of the breed? Is it a matter of the current owner not knowing how to handle the issue? Last but not least is: would we be risking the dog injuring someone as a result of any behavioral issues. We have said no, when we didn’t have a way to take care of the dog, we have occasionally taken in and with a heavy heart after evaluation by multiple trainers and breeders put down a dog.
Unfortunately Diana’s heart appears to get in the way of her objectivity more often than not when it comes to running her rescue organization.
As for the dog I was there to evaluate. I was able to surmise that she, the dog trainers who evaluated the dog nor the foster family were familiar with training and personality of the breed and as such it was reacting due to it’s treatment by the previous owner. She surrendered the dog into our rescue program. I handed it off to one of our experienced foster families, within 24 hours they agreed with my initial evaluation, worked with modifying the behavior and some obedience training the puppy was placed in a forever home a couple weeks later.
Thanks for letting is know what you experienced and learned. I’m hearing lots of stories like that. All the people telling these stories can’t be lying.
I have personally dealt with Diana. It was not a pleasant experience. I want to know where a dog named Gordon is, I am unable to get a straight answer out of anyone. I have heard he was in a foster home, that he is in boarding, and I know she was begging money for him a crate/ kennel. If anyone involved with her can tell me where Gordon is and how he is I would greatly appreciate it.
If you can give more details about Gordon please send them to info@seattledogspot.com.
Having adopted a dog from PURRR Rescue, it was clear to me that this was more of an animal trafficking/flipping organization then a rescue. I worked with Collie Rescue and Humane Animal Rescue Team in Southern California. PURRR is not a dog rescue that I would recommend to anyone. I wrote a letter to Petco Charities after my adoption experience with Diane, and told them what I thought. We have had several behavior issues with the dog we adopted. If I wasn’t an experienced dog owner, this dog would have been surrendered to the Humane Society and euthanized.