Tehama County Rescue group could be on hook for fees

The Tehama County Animal Shelter's biggest critic is operating with a non-profit license that has been suspended since 2002.

[andjustice4all]

My my how the tables will turn. Are we to assume that Res-Q should now be on the hook for its own commercial kennel license as well as ALL of the fees that ALL of the counties have waived? Guess its a good thing that Ms Hopper was turned away at the door and denied the bulk of Burch's dogs, seems like the bill is going to be quite hefty. Guess you should make sure all is well in your backyard before you start singing to the heavens about others huh?

[Kelly]

andjustice4all wrote:

My my how the tables will turn. Are we to assume that Res-Q should now be on the hook for its own commercial kennel license as well as ALL of the fees that ALL of the counties have waived? Guess its a good thing that Ms Hopper was turned away at the door and denied the bulk of Burch's dogs, seems like the bill is going to be quite hefty. Guess you should make sure all is well in your backyard before you start singing to the heavens about others huh?

Check your sources, my dear, licenses are in place.

[Kelly]

Nobody has ever claimed cruelty. The fact is he is operating without a kennel license or being zoned properly.

[FIREBRICK]

It seems Kelly didn't read the article we are all commenting on...

"A spokeswoman for the California Secretary of State told the Daily News on Wednesday the 501(c)3 license belonging to ResQ Animal Coalition, which specializes in rescuing toy dogs, had been suspended when the operation failed to give the state its Statement of Information, a document used to identify the owners of the organization, and an accompanying $20 fee in 2002."

I read the words "suspended in 2002" and don't see anything saying valid and "in place".

And Kelly, you did claim cruelty when you stated Burch's dogs were kept in "rabbit cages" breeding over and over.
I suggest you take the loss of the shelter dogs and move on, there are plenty of other dogs needing real rescue and re-homing.

[wisdom]

Resq. is in compliance, Mr. Burch is not, and never has been. Good for you, Kelly who ever you may be.

[FIREBRICK]

So, it's okay for dogs to be kept in rabbit cages and bred perpetually as long as you have the right permits??

I have never claimed Red Bluff Daily News is a font of information, but you have to think they put some investigation into their stories.

The same policies should be in effect whether the kennel is a breeder or a rescue. The problem I have is when the "rescue" is claiming non-profit, yet charge more for the rescued dogs than the legitimate breeder that has to claim and pay taxes on his business.

Just be responsible and mature enough to take your piece of the pie when it comes your way.

[Belinda]

I saved this posting from the Redding Craigslist under Pets. Thought you might find it interesting. "Rescue Group (DramaTown)" is the title and the body of the article reads as follows:
"This is what I have experienced personally so people will get some insight as to what is going on. I personally adopted two of the toy puppies from the shelter. While I was at the Animal Care Facility, Janie Hopper stood over my shoulder complaining about the two puppies being adopted to "a red bluff hick"- yep folks that is what she referred to Red Bluff residents as! Janie Hopper was infuriated that the shelter was offering these toy breed puppies to the general tax paying public before releasing them to her. Two things...1- If she is such an "animal advocate" then why would she not be happy that the two puppies were getting a loving home? 2.She was so concerned about the puppies and their welfare-but chose to ignore the countless other animals that are less adoptable that really need the help of a rescue to help save them from euthanasia? I was less than impressed by Janie Hopper and her reaction to my adoption as well as how rude she was to me, as well as the staff at the Animal Care Facility. I hope that people really look at the intentions behind such a rescue group. Consider the type of dogs they "rescue", the adoption fee's...etc. Why would anyone be so infuriated about animals finding a loving home? So angry that she felt the need to reach out to the Daily News, trying to spotlight the animal shelter for ADOPTING ANIMALS-like it was a bad thing? You be the judge."

[Belinda]

I have one more issue I would like clarification on if anyone has that knowledge. In the Daily News yesterday, it stated that the first sign of Parvo in one of Mr. Burch's dogs appeared on October 9, 2009. Does anyone know the date that the dogs were taken from Mr. Burch's place? The Shelter has had parvo from time to time. I would be wondering whether or not they contracted something after they were seized. Possibly just by being transported in the Animal Control vehicle which could have been contaminated with the parvo virus very easily. It wasn't totally clear to me whether the dogs were held a the shelter or whether they spent the whole time at Valley Vet. Does anyone have info on this. Thanks.

[Red Bluff Libertarian]

I'm copying this from my own posting on another thread:

"The reason for the 48 hour waiting period for rescues to take dogs from the county shelter, allowing members of the public an opportunity to adopt, is that for years this group has had insiders from the shelter working with them, letting them know that small, easily adoptable dogs were taken in, and when they would become available (after a state mandated holding period). Res-Q members would be waiting at the door the moment the dog was available, while members of the public who were seeking a small dog to adopt were told there was nothing available. After some research was done, the 48 hour wait time was put into place some years ago."

There were other instances reflecting Belinda's general experience; and a general attitude (by Res-Q) that small dogs would be better served by being adopted to people who could well afford their fees... in other words, outside of Tehama County.

And if those eventual adopters had such wonderful homes, I never understood why they didn't adopt directly from the shelter, or why Res-Q didn't refer them to the shelter. Well, I suspected it was a money issue, but I can't say for sure.

[Kelly]

Animal Control seized the dogs on Sept 29th. ResQ doesn't have a problem with the animals being released to the general public, they have a problem with them hitting the shelter (Tehama)which is known to have had Parvo problems in the past. Also, they are not being vaccinated or altered before being adopted out. The last seizure of Jerry's dogs were taken from his home directly to rescues and while there were many medical issues with them they did not have Parvo. Adoption fees directly coorelate with expenses to return the dogs to good health and temperment, not how much the dog may "be worth". ResQ is NON- profit unlike backyard breeders.

[andjustice4all]

Belinda wrote:

I have one more issue I would like clarification on if anyone has that knowledge. In the Daily News yesterday, it stated that the first sign of Parvo in one of Mr. Burch's dogs appeared on October 9, 2009. Does anyone know the date that the dogs were taken from Mr. Burch's place? The Shelter has had parvo from time to time. I would be wondering whether or not they contracted something after they were seized. Possibly just by being transported in the Animal Control vehicle which could have been contaminated with the parvo virus very easily. It wasn't totally clear to me whether the dogs were held a the shelter or whether they spent the whole time at Valley Vet. Does anyone have info on this. Thanks.

"According to Parker, when deputies visited Burch's property Sept. 24, they were denied access. On returning on the Sept. 29, deputies found Burch attempted to avoid a citation by hiding dogs on his neighbor's property."

According to the article where Mr Burch was cited, the dogs were picked up on Sept, 29th. I am sure that all of the rescue activists are aware that Parvo is highly contagious and could be picked up during any time, absolutely it could have come from the shelter, the transport vehicle or from the shoes of a citizen who picked up the puppies while they were at the shelter. Parvo has an incubation period of 3 to 14 days. If Mr Burch's kennels were infected, all of his puppies would be too and the rescue groups who claim that they have been there investigating know it. Play fair guys, pick a side and stick to it. Poor Kelly has no idea where she stands, Kel the dogs are either neglected or they're not don't make insinuations and then back track when the heat is on. It is very clear that you are closely affiliated with Res-Q and I'm not sure if you like Janie have been running around making a jerk of yourself. Just step back and think about how this all looks from the outside looking in, read Belinda's comment, is that how you want your only for the good "charity" organization to be portrayed? It's obvious that you all aren't in it only for the good of the animals

[Belinda]

andjustice4all....you seem pretty knowledgable. I think I remember hearing that there was a search warrant used to gather the dogs. If that is correct, how were the authorities able to cross the property line and seize the dogs that were at the neighbors. I thought that search warrants were issued for a certain location. Just wondering....seems like everyone has bent the rules a little here. What is your take on it?

[andjustice4all]

Kelly wrote:

<quoted text>
I stand firm and clear on my position, maybe you're having trouble with comprehension. Not my problem. I have bigger fish to fry.

"That's right, keep letting him breed, infecting more dogs with Parvo and turn the other cheek."
"You aren't licensed or zoned foe a kennel and you keep your dogs in rabbit cages to breed over and over. SICKENING!"
"Rescues don't have a problem with reputable, ethical breeders, we have a problem with puppy mills and the conditions under which these puppies are being bred."
"Puppies have been diagnosed with having Parvo, all but 2 are being put down by Tehama County."

No trouble with my comprehension Kelly, I cut and pasted these quotes of yours directly from the same forum we are using now. These posts were from the citing of Burch, the strained relationship and the current article if you need to refresh your memory.

[andjustice4all]

Belinda wrote:

andjustice4all....you seem pretty knowledgable. I think I remember hearing that there was a search warrant used to gather the dogs. If that is correct, how were the authorities able to cross the property line and seize the dogs that were at the neighbors. I thought that search warrants were issued for a certain location. Just wondering....seems like everyone has bent the rules a little here. What is your take on it?

I really have no knowledge of the incident other than what has been published in the paper. I'm not sure how they were able to access the neighboring residences, its possible that they got information that the dogs were there prior to getting the warrant and added the address to the warrant.

[Sharon Clopp]

Please someone explain to me how them being rescued from CERTAIN deat h at your so called Animal Shelter can be a bad thing. Why don't you let the public know your ratio for adoption verses euthansia. For you to go after a resque group is a shame and you should be ashamed!

[Kelly]

Sharon Clopp wrote:

Please someone explain to me how them being rescued from CERTAIN deat h at your so called Animal Shelter can be a bad thing. Why don't you let the public know your ratio for adoption verses euthansia. For you to go after a resque group is a shame and you should be ashamed!

It appears that some people feel animals are disposable possessions only to be used for personal gain.

[Jerry Burch]

My disability and Medi-cal isn't enough for me to survive on so I have to sell puppies to supplement my income.

[Sharon Clopp]

Kelly wrote:

Animal Control seized the dogs on Sept 29th. ResQ doesn't have a problem with the animals being released to the general public, they have a problem with them hitting the shelter (Tehama)which is known to have had Parvo problems in the past. Also, they are not being vaccinated or altered before being adopted out. The last seizure of Jerry's dogs were taken from his home directly to rescues and while there were many medical issues with them they did not have Parvo. Adoption fees directly coorelate with expenses to return the dogs to good health and temperment, not how much the dog may "be worth". ResQ is NON- profit unlike backyard breeders.

I totally think ANY resque group is great! You Go!

[ANDREW TEHAMA COUNTY]

Kelly wrote:

Nobody has ever claimed cruelty. The fact is he is operating without a kennel license or being zoned properly.

--check your facts, flashback was legally licensed by tehama county for many years prior to the wrong zoneing being discovered..yes, kelly--you and your group know the truth and have many times falsly accused burch of cruelty--and it is kelly conner isnt it? the same one who sneaked onto the kennel property and took a dog for adoption--only paying for the shots-the same kelly that sneaked phone camera pictures and turned them over to hooper? and why dont you put your correct address if you are soo honest instead of other states?

[ANDREW TEHAMA COUNTY]

wisdom wrote:

Resq. is in compliance, Mr. Burch is not, and never has been. Good for you, Kelly who ever you may be.

she is kelly conner--member pet coalition in redding--hope this was helpful answer to your question--god bless you for asking.