Treats on the Internets

In Ohio, the Clark County Board of Health declared a shelter called One More Chance Rescue & Adoption run by Jeff Burgess a public health nuisance.  367 live dogs and 15 cats were removed from the property.  There are 69 photos of the raid but none of them contain clear images of the dogs or the housing facilities.  Most are of trash and debris.  Mr. Burgess already faces cruelty charges in Piqua, with regard to another shelter he operated there.  Authorities in Piqua seized 100 dogs from that facility.  (Thanks Clarice and Kim for sending in links on this story.)

The Lynchburg Humane Society in VA talks about how they saved so many more pets last year by introducing new programs including fostering, counseling owners considering pet surrender, low cost spay-neuter and adoption specials.  (Thanks Clarice.)

A new tethering ordinance goes into effect March 1 in Charlotte, NC.  Check out the puppy hanging device AC & C recommends in the photo.  (Thanks Samantha for the link.)

The MO Humane Society rescued 74 dogs, mostly Collies, from a breeder whose license was revoked after an inspection this month.  The article notes:

The Stone County breeder lost its license under current Missouri standards, not the tighter regulations laid out in Proposition B.

(Thank you Laura for the link.)

Warning:  This next one may be too disturbing for sensitive readers.  Just scroll to the end of the post if you want to skip.

File under I Wish I Hadn’t Read That:  A NM man allegedly beat his dog in his yard and then attempted to burn his balls off – like yeah, with fire – in order to avoid paying a neuter surgery fee to a vet.  A good Samaritan paid for the dog, called Charlie, to receive treatment:

Charlie has now recovered and is living with a new owner. However, the veterinarian who examined him said the dog is blind and had wounds on his ears, head and genitals.

(Thank you Clarice for that link.  I think.)

Blog note:  If you’d like to nominate a Shelter Pet of the Day for the blog, please visit this page for details.

9 thoughts on “Treats on the Internets

  1. This Jeff Burgess guy is obviously not capable of running any kind of actual shelter. I’m struggling really hard to figure out how he thought he could care for SO many animals! I hope they throw the book at him. If people want to help animals, this is so not the way to do it. Way to go Jeff, making rescuers look bad. UGH.

    Here are some more articles about the first place shut down:

  2. If I said what I’d like to do to the guy in NM, I’d probably get kicked off this blog! The guy needs to be locked away in a dark cell somewhere he can’t do any more harm to another living being. Glad the poor dog at least survived the torture and has found a new home.

  3. Thanks for sharing -I know it is tough and yeah I filed that under things I wish I didn’t know. I’m glad he at least has another home.

    1. I just feel like some people – and they represent an extremely tiny percentage of the human population – are freaks to the degree that it might be best if they were never around anything that breathes. Ever. Which sounds totally inhumane, I know.

  4. Treat to add. Here in Massachusetts, a 4yo unneutered male Golden named “Skippy” found himself condemned to death following two incidents with his owner’s young granddaughter. Through the miracle of social media–and ransom paid in the amount of $2,500–looks like Skippy will live to wag his tail into the future. It would be great if the “Skippy’s Law” being thought about becomes a reality. For more background, see the FB page at

  5. A new tethering ordinance goes into effect March 1 in Charlotte, NC. Check out the puppy hanging device AC & C recommends in the photo. (Thanks Samantha for the link.)

    I would be interested in your opinion on tethering laws. A city in my area has one, but my community does not. I would like to see one implemented and have intentions of contacting my local commissioner. And for full disclosure, in the past, I did tether animals I had and am now ashamed to say I did that. It was many years ago and I have learned since then it is not the way that I would ever keep an animal again.

    1. I support responsible tethering when no reasonable alternatives exist. Responsible tethering, to my mind, does not mean keeping a dog chained 24/7. It may however, include scenarios that fall outside the limitations specified in many of these anti-tethering ordinances. Basically, I don’t want dogs being taken from owners (and possibly killed in shelters) who tether responsibly.

      1. While I have NEVER kept a dog tethered for a indefinite amount of time – I do admit that prior to installing a fence we tethered our dogs when they went outside, but we were with them the whole time AND when I had multiple dogs here at once I would use individual tethers if they were ‘newbies’ and I wasn’t sure how they would react to being in the yard with the rest of the dogs. While I am against doing it to dogs 24/7 – I know of too many people who could actualy benefit from tethering…they are renters who do not have fenced in yards and just let their dogs run. I can’t tell you how many days I have spent my morning “returning” people’s dogs. I ALWAYS give them a fair chance and discuss tethering the dog when they let them out to go to the bathroom (I even suggest where to go buy everything for less than $10). In cases like that tethering is needed – so I hope the new laws aren’t so strict that they don’t take situations like those into consideration…..

Leave a Reply