Thursday, February 2, 2012


The facts are in and it is showing an increase in hoarding and cruelty cases from "No Kill" rescues. Keep in mind that the "activists" coming after Devore are of the "No Kill" mentality. Already these "activists" have pulled dogs and left them to die in a kennel. Those dogs had to be rescued.

Of greater significance are the numbers of animals rescued from hoarders who actually purport to be operating no-kill shelters. There was some improvement on that front in 2011, but those cases shouldn't exist at all:

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, November/December 2010: [EXCERPT] The numbers of dogs and cats taken in from failed animal shelters and nonprofit shelterless rescues in 2010 appear likely to exceed the numbers impounded from breeders for the first time in the 19 years that ANIMAL PEOPLE has kept track. About 4,600 dogs and cats had been taken in from failed shelters and rescues as of Thanksgiving 2010, almost the same as the then-record number taken in from failed shelters and rescues in the whole of 2009. The 2010 figure projects to a total of nearly 5,000 for the year, or 25% of the total number of dogs and cats impounded in neglect cases.

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, January/February 2012:

Puppy millers move from malls to web sites [EXCERPT] Impoundments of dogs and cats from failed shelters and rescues rose from 2,159 in 2005 to nearly 5,000 in 2010, exceeding the number impounded from puppy mills for the first time, but dropped back to 3,165 in 2011.

Merritt Clifton Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE Web:


  1. Even more concerning is the growing trend to transport dozens if not hundreds of animals out of state by unregulated “animal rescues.” Recently a U-Haul truck packed with over a hundred dogs was stopped in Tennessee and the “animal rescuers” were charged with animal cruelty for transporting the dogs in such an inhumane manner. We have heard of van loads of dogs being transported across state lines and animals that died in transit.

    Most animal rescue organizations only select a few animals that they work with at any given time. But there has been a proliferation of organizations that are accepting dozens of animals at a time and the County is required by law to allow these groups the opportunity to receive the animals, if specific conditions exist.

    Who knows what happens to the animals when they are transported across County? In certain cases, this only results in the animals becoming victims once again to abuse and abandonment.

  2. It's already becoming a scam. This blog does have many, many cases of the horrors of the "Highway to Hell". Just do a search on it for "transport".

  3. This might be of interest to people. Seems there was a case of breeder cruelty in Tompkins County while Winograd was there. The question was raised as to why he didn't bust this breeder. His answer was he wanted to gradually reduce the breeder's numbers. During that gradually reducing phase of Winograd's, animals were left to suffer and die. And this is almost two years after he admits he knew of this breeder. This was an op-ed piece in the Ithaca Journal.

    ""In February 2003, the Groton kennel relinquished 59 dogs to Tompkins County SPCA. The SPCA maintained there were signs of neglect and long-term medical problems. Records showed that the kennel had never been cited for conditions in the nine years it had operated. The SPCA, the American Kennel Club and the State of New York had all inspected the kennel. After an initial license inspection, the New York Dept. of Agriculture and Markets contacted Mr. Winograd to inform him of the conditions in the Groton kennel. Winograd admitted he had known about the Groton kennel conditions since he began as director of Tompkins County SPCA. His goal was to “gradually” reduce the number of animals at the kennel. An Ithaca Journal op ed at the time argued that Winograd and the SPCA dropped the ball on the abusive kennel by failing to follow through with appropriate action.

    Since the SPCA routinely facilitates the prosecution of animal abuse, it is puzzling that this organization recently went out of its way to claim serious incidents of neglect at a dog breeding facility without following through with charges. In other instances of alleged violations of state animal welfare laws, the SPCA quickly handed the cases over to law enforcement authorities for prosecution. Why not now?""

  4. people need to read the definition of 'no kill'.

    So in case you haven't, here it is:

    from with website nokillnow, "What is Adoptable? 1834.4. (a)
    "No adoptable animal should be euthanized if it can be adopted into a suitable home. Adoptable animals include only those animals eight weeks of age or older that, at or subsequent to the time the animal is impounded or otherwise taken into possession, have manifested no sign of a behavioral or temperamental defect that could pose a health or safety risk or otherwise make the animal unsuitable for placement as a pet, and have manifested no sign of disease, injury, or congenital or hereditary condition that adversely affects the health of the animal or that is likely to adversely affect the animal's health in the future."

    So if I read this right, animals that are aggressive or 'could pose a health or safety risk' or that are sick should be euthanized (oops, I mean killed).

    So if the rescues really want to make a difference, Cujo needs a home. How about yours, rescues??? Remember Buddy???

  5. That sounds like the Hayden Act more than "No Kill" which says save 'em all. "No Kill" has supported the Hayden even though it allows puppies and kittens under 8 weeks to be euthanized. The Hayden mandate paid shelters to euthanize. Plus you don't have to be a non profit to pull from shelters, just tell them you are a rescue and they have to give you pets just like a non profit. And they say "No Kill" doesn't promote hoarding?


Remember no accusations without proof. Rant if you will, it won't be published.