Because there is no law that regulates "rescues" and there is no oversight for rescues in California? Further, there is still likely no oversight for groups that claim they are non profit but actually make profits off of reselling seized pets? Let me give an example. An alleged rescue group seizes 30 dogs or puppies and uses the CA penal code to do the seizure. Likely illegally from what cases attorney has seen.
THEN these people get together and make up a story which is not actually true, and then SELL the very animals that they claim NO ONE should be allowed to sell? (They have a law passed which makes it illegal to sell an animal such as a dog or cat--- ONLY the non profit or rescues or the pound is allowed to SELL the animals?)
" On Jan. 1, 2019, California enacted a prohibition on the sales of dogs, cats and rabbits in retail stores unless the animals were acquired from a shelter or rescue group that has a cooperative agreement with a shelter, humane society or society of the prevention of cruelty to animals."
In this county, do we really believe that no rescues are making bank? If you believe that then you don't know much about sales, resale, or animals as pets. The truth is, there is a shortage of available good pet stock, and the animal rights rescues purposely intend to keep it that way so that they can lure you into the poor liddle puppy dog syndrome like an idiot? Because you bought into their baloney nonsense? So much of the public have never understood this bait switch nonsense. But because we worked in the industry for years, we have long known how it works.
Forget buying an animal from a rescue unless it's a cat rescue. [Cats have very little value when it comes to obtaining a cat unless it's a very expensive breed.] Buy your own puppy from a reputable breeder that actually knows the history of their animals, knows how to take care of them, and will not give away their animals cheaply. Do not believe idiots who tell you stories about where the animals allegely come from...
https://www.scribd.com/document/10631836/The-Process-Church-and-Alistair-Cooke-- go read at least the first 2 paragraphs and you will get the drift. They are not much different from Scientology. Probably worse. There's nothing wrong with saving animals if you actually are getting them homes. "Given the many concerns about the outcomes for people and pets, coupled with the lack of evidence to show their efficacy, Best Friends does not support mandatory spay and neuter." WELL, nearly every county in California forces mandated altering UNLESS there is a local law that states differently. ALL shelter and rescued animals are allegedly required to be ALTERED.
You show us a way that hundreds of dogs no on wants simply get new homes out of thin air?? Every month? LOL Yeah right. The Los angeles barrio/general area might have less animals but it's still hundreds every month from more than one area. No one is probably counting (even though the state could do it) but to kill an animal usually they use the blue solution which is highly regulated. If they can't kill them all then they have to get rid of them because they can't keep them there. Supposedly their "numbers" are all great because they claim to just move and truck them out. Yeah, and who is following what dogs go where? We bet no one. Let's not forget, Best Friends owns TWO JETS. They are millionaires many times over. They spent either $40,000 or more just to fly to a European country and bring back STRAY DOGS???? Now if that doesn't piss you off, you need to be more informed.
Example, Riverside, re "
Altering of animals, dogs/cats.. Exemptions. This section shall not apply to any of the following:A.A dog with a high likelihood of suffering serious bodily harm or death if spayed or neutered, due to age or infirmity. The owner or custodian must obtain written confirmation of this fact from a California licensed veterinarian. If the dog is able to be safely spayed or neutered at a later date, that date must be stated in the written confirmation; should this date be later than thirty (30) days, the owner or custodian must apply for an unaltered dog license. B.In the event that any dog follows under Section 6.08.120 A.3.A. of this chapter, a mandatory spay and neuter deposit fee of seventy-five dollars ($75.00) shall be paid before the animal is released from the shelter.C.A cat with a high likelihood of suffering serious bodily harm or death if spayed or neutered, due to age or infirmity. The owner or custodian must obtain written confirmation of this fact from a California licensed veterinarian. If the cat is able to be safely spayed or neutered at a later date, that date must be stated in the written confirmation.D.In the event any cat follows under section 6.08.120 A.3.C. of this chapter, a mandatory spay and neuter deposit fee of forty dollars ($40.00) shall be paid before the animal is released from the shelter.E.Animals owned by recognized dog or cat breeders, as defined by department of animal services policy.F.Females over the age of 10 and males over the age of 12 are exempt from the spay and neuter requirement due to the biological improbability of reproduction, however, they will be required to purchase an unaltered license.
To be frank, only in a state like liberal California could people get away with interfering with commerce, such as with raising dogs to sell? The very clear implication is that in lower income areas such as barrios of Los angeles, most of the animals are not altered. Animal control just keeps taking them to the pounds. People who actually WANT to buy a dog from a breeder will often have to search far and wide and even sometimes buy the animal from another state. Breeders of titled dogs sell their dogs for very high prices and do not have huge litters (since they are raising show dogs..)
If you doubt anything stated herein, perhaps doing your own research from NON rescues or claimed 501(c)(3) groups will shed new light on what you don't know. Most people don't know and simply do not care, or they are not smart enough to do diligent research.
--- > WARNING.........CAREFULLY NOTE-- any type of tinkering or attempt to cause cessation or otherwise interfere with this site can be plausibly considered as interfering with a legal business that may, in certain cirumstances, fall under either the CA law re illegal actions, or the Federal law regarding same. Businesses that deal with animal enterprises will likely qualify [yes, this business of doing legal work with animal issues/animal enterprises would qualify in our opinion] Consider that stealing or even just releasing minks (live animals) out of their cages caused two young men to receive 14 year federal prison sentences. It is unlikely that the federal law will be changed.
