Treats on the Internets

An ACO in TX picked up a dog who had gotten out of his fenced yard during an afternoon storm and left him at the Williamson Co Regional Animal Shelter noting the dog appeared healthy.  When the owner came the next morning to reclaim her pet, she was told the dog had been found dead in his cage and no one knows what happened.  The shelter posted a picture of the dead dog on its website and apparently no one knows how that happened either.  A necropsy will be performed to try and determine what caused the dog’s death.  (Thank you Clarice for the link.)


A NC pet owner has filed a lawsuit against Columbus Co alleging that the pound killed his pitbull before the 72 hour state mandated holding period had expired.  The county claims the dog was aggressive and the killing was legal.  (Thanks Clarice.)


Just before proposing a mandatory spay-neuter ordinance specifically targeting pitbulls and pitbull mixes to the Beaufort Co Council in SC, Tallulah Trice, director of the county pound, went ironic:

It’s not the breed we’re going after.

Trice said 90% of the animals killed at the pound are pitbulls and added:

People just can’t adopt them.

Well I guess not. Since you’re killing them like it’s going out of style.


NJ is considering a bill that would require people accused of animal abuse to either pay whatever amount the local shelter demands for care or forfeit their animals before they ever get a chance at trial.


A blind woman’s guide dog hurled himself between her and an oncoming bus.  Both were injured but will be ok.  The dog and his person were upset when they had to be separated because dogs are not allowed in ambulances.  They ought to change that rule.


Just an octopus walking around with coconut shells to use as a portable hideout.  (Thanks Valerie.)

2 thoughts on “Treats on the Internets

  1. Re proposed NJ law concerning bond for care of animals seized in cruelty cases: NC has such a law (NCGS 19A-70). It primarily impacts struggling private rescuers who have no idea of their rights. They are unaware that under 19a(70)(c) et seq. the defendant may be permitted to retain the animals pending trial under AC supervision if the judge determines that defendant cannot pay the accumulating bond (which most of course can’t).
    I recently had such a bond hearing. We were treated respectfully & received a full & fair hearing (which doesn’t always happen). County atty. said this provision had never been invoked in these hearings. We presented bank statements showing disability pmts. for Defendant #1 & Social Security for Defendant #2 as primary sources of income. The judge scrutinized the statements & decided that Defendants could pay because he saw evidence of substantial expenditures. Defendant #1 then acknowledged receiving a loan from a relative. What were the expenditures for? You guessed it — vet bills.
    There is a lot of work to be done.

  2. The story in NC seems to change depending on who you’re talking to going by the article. The shelter manager said the dog was put down due to a swollen face from a probable snake bite. Did a vet make that ruling or did she happen to attend medical school?

    The county manager says the dog was dangerous, and they were within their rights because someone they knew not to be the owner signed a paper.

    So in short, we wanted to kill him and didn’t think anyone would challenge us. Now we’re going to lie and not bother to keep up with what we said before. Because it isn’t like anyone can force us to change our ways.

Leave a Reply to Alice Cancel reply