Son of Lassie's Trainer: Give the Dog Back!

61. well if it was a child then she would have had the right as the adoptive mother to decide where the child would be raised. kids have less rights than dogs apparently.well except in this case where the psychopath would euthanize the dog rather than turn it back over.

r.i.p. iggy.

Posted at 7:57PM on Oct 17th 2007 by Dogs & Children Not the Same

62. If Ellen's house members bought the dog from the mad-woman and realized that the dog did not match their household, the dog can be legally gifted to the daughters of Ellen's hairdresser without any strings to the mad-woman.

I once owned a menacing Rhodesian Ridgeback. One day, my child walked in with a "rescue" 3-month old kitten from the sidewalk. There was a helluva commotion between the dog and cat. I was so damn angry over the mess they created - on top of it all, I took the cat into the bathroom and gave it a flea bath in the tub. Since the dog was just as much to be blamed for the brawl - he was punished with a bath too. I must have done something right because as the result of being bathe - both calmed right down. As they dried off - both smelled alike so there were no further threatening "smells." Within 1 week they became buddies.

Posted at 8:04PM on Oct 17th 2007 by Mrs. Wilson

63. I mentioned this in the other thread too.

A good friend of mine has done some rescue work. She and I were talking about this and she said the sad reality is that the majority of these rescuers are a little "off". Kind of like the people that go to every Star Trek convention are a little "special" in their own way. Well apparently this is also true of the rescue world. I think the actions of Mutts&Moms as well as many comments in this thread clearly show this to be the case.

They have good intentions but don't have a good grip on reality. For many of these folks, no one is good enough to adopt these pets, whom they place on the same level as humans. M&M probably meant well, but they're social skills aren't up to par and they truly cannot see that what they did was wrong

Posted at 8:00PM on Oct 17th 2007 by ARR

64. It's sad that now the dogs that this shelter wants to find homes for will probably never be adopted because who will go to them now??? Not only Iggy but every dog in their care will suffer as a result of their childishness. Hopefully other shelters won't also suffer a drop off in adoptions because people will fear losing a dog because of this woman's inane actions. All she had to do was do a home evaluation on this family which animal lover Ellen deemed a good home for Iggy. This should have been about the DOG, not this woman's ego. Shelters do have very good reasons for the rule to return animals they adopt out, but a little reason and flexibility was called for here, not calling the cops!!

Posted at 8:05PM on Oct 17th 2007 by bogie

65. IF THIS AGENCY HAD SCREENED ELLN PROPERLY THEN MAYBE THEY WOULDNT HAVE ADOPTED THE DOG OUT TO HER! As everyone keeps pointing out she doesn't have the best track record with adoptive animals. So if they had DONE THEIR JOBS and what they were SUPPOSED to do, they would have avoided this.

They FAILED this dog and should not be allowed to work in RESCUE anymore!!!!

Yeah just overlook the facts that they didn't do their jobs and defend them, but Ellen is not alone in having made a mistake. The only people who did NOT make mistakes are the kids their family and the poor dog. Yet they suffer the most out of this.

They should not be alone in suffering DOWN WITH NAZI RESCUE PRACTICES! They showed preferential treatment to Ellen and this is what resulted. They are as much at fault as Ellen.

Posted at 8:01PM on Oct 17th 2007 by stick to rules then

66. You people aren't paying attention: if the animal rescue clowns don't have a California State license, they cannot have a valid contract with legal rules, regulations and policies.

Unlicensed pet adoption!
Unlicensed pet adoption!
Unlicensed pet adoption!
Unlicensed pet adoption!
Unlicensed pet adoption!
Unlicensed pet adoption!

DO YOU HEAR ME NOW?

Posted at 8:05PM on Oct 17th 2007 by Jeeeeeez

67. ELLEN could have handled it differently. The rescue became involved when the dog they adopted to her was no longer with her. At any rate, Iggy is in his new home and is not bawling for two strange children like some would like to believe.

Posted at 8:10PM on Oct 17th 2007 by Me

68. Actually, the rescue is registered as a non-profit until '08.

Posted at 8:13PM on Oct 17th 2007 by Me

69. You could do what I did. One clause said they had the "right" to inspect my house and backyard anytime they wanted. I politely told them I would not agree to this and crossed it off the contract.

They let me adopt the dog anyway.

I'm of the opinion that the best way to get a dog is from the SPCA, Humane Society, or City Pound and leave these animal nut rescue groups alone. Most require spay or neutering, but that's reasonable given the number of unwanted animals.

Posted at 8:14PM on Oct 17th 2007 by Longshot

70. #65 - they have a suspension

Posted at 8:16PM on Oct 17th 2007 by Jeeeeeez

71. Mrs Wilson: A dog under verbal and especially written contract can't be regifted (if that's against the contract, and find me one responsible rescue that allows it), regardless of the reason it doesn't work out or the new person it involves. No rescue (or smart person) would allow a child to adopt. In fact, it's illegal in most/all places. You don't just throw two new animals together. They should meet on neutral ground and when safely confined (leash, crate, etc). The dog and kitten is not at fault, 100% human error. Ridgebacks can be animal aggressive, that's why I stress researching. It's important to know and understand breed traits, so you're not caught off-guard and are very careful. You can scrub them to death, it won't make them smell different, except to us. Their noses are far more sensitive than ours, you didn't trick them. It was nothing more than a coincidence.

Posted at 8:39PM on Oct 17th 2007 by Me

72. The group never changed the chip. That was wrong.

Posted at 10:06PM on Oct 17th 2007 by crymeariver

73. I hope they get shut down and the store gets sold to the family as part of the compensation so the people can suffer the shame.

Posted at 10:06PM on Oct 17th 2007 by crymeariver

74. Interesting that this organization may have had its license suspended. I'd sure like to know why---find out TMZ!!!! Of course these rescue organizations have to have strict procedures and rules to protect the animals from irresponsible owners. I don't have a problem with that. But according to reports, they didn't evaluate Ellen's home and they didn't change the info on Iggy's ID locator chip which is part of their contract too. So where do they get off creating this problem for the dog and the family. They don't have to live up to the contract but Ellen does? And she owned up to her mistake, asking that the kids and Iggy not be punished for her lapse. Very sad. I don't think this psycho woman should be running a shelter. I have owned and loved dogs for over 50 years, but I think her actions are counterproductive. Again, it's about the dogs, not her!

Posted at 8:55PM on Oct 17th 2007 by bogie

75. Me: You are correct. Everyone else dismissing the contract issue are not very well informed.

Posted at 8:56PM on Oct 17th 2007 by mia