My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« New JAVMA study on the limitations of Breed Specific Legislation | Main | Where do people get their pets (& where do they plan to get them?) »

October 08, 2010


Dianne in DC

WARL took in 10 of them. Two are already up for adoption, the others need a little more time. The same deep voiced dude who coaxed Jasmine into eating a meatball is working with them, as are the behavior and training staff. I'm really proud to be a part of this.


I'm so glad you took two! HSUS staff must be working so hard they don't have time to answer a single email asking a yes or no question. I've emailed about 5 people trying to get in touch with an organization that will allow me to provide a foster home for one, or to allow me to foster through a local rescue - nothing. It's too bad.


Jennie, what city are you in?


omg! I love little Edith's face! She's my ideal pittie :)


jen, she'll be available for adoption soon :)


What a nice story!

But how did HSUS get involved in this situation, anyway? Perhaps their on-again/off-again love affair with "pit bulls" has something to do with Randall Lockwood going to ASPCA a few years ago.


I'm pretty sure the local authorities called them once this all went down. I'm not really sure on the details though.

Dianne in DC

About two years ago, I was invited to a town hall meeting by HSUS / Wayne Pacelle. At the meeting in DC, he heard much tearful testimony as to pitbulls being automatically put down because of their breed. I'm quite sure he heard similar stories across the country. That, and the success of the Vick dogs, and perhaps some changes in personell, and discussions with BADRAP and other pitbull advocates has influenced HSUS to change their policy. And Jennie in Philadelphia, come down to DC and you can meet some more. Little Taft is available and gets along with other dogs.

Lisa in OH

We have a couple of these guys in our rescue also. My daughter also wanted to foster but was told they had more than enough foster homes and adoptive homes lined up. I was a bit shocked at that.


Cute photos!

It wasn't so long ago that the HSUS opposed TNR too, now they advocate for it. I guess it's baby steps with HSUS. No Kill advocates keep advocating for the elements in the No Kill Equation that will stop the killing of healthy and treatable animals and one by one, inch by inch, the HSUS stops fighting us on these life saving issues.

Just curious, did HSUS collect donations on this group of dogs like they have in the past, even when they do not take part in their care?


Houston -- agreed that it is baby steps for HSUS at times. And while I have been justifiably critical of HSUS in the past over this, I am happy that they seem to be turningn over a new leaf.

Meanwhile, I have not seen any requests for donations for these dogs. I know they've been pretty quiet on this because the owner has not been charged yet with anything -- so that may have kept them from speaking up.

Lisa -- it is my understanding that some of the dogs are still in boarding (at least, as of Tuesday), so I'm not sure why they would have denied a couple going to foster homes.


Hi, I am working on placement for HSUS on this case - we are definately still looking for rescue groups that can take in dogs. The dogs do need to go to rescues, so if you are able to foster, I would recommend contacting your local rescue and seeing if they could take one in that you could foster. You can email me at [email protected], thanks for wanting to help!

PAMM - People Against Murdering Monsters

Glad real animal lovers finally persuaded the biggest, richest "animal welfare" org to finally quit slaughtering dogs. Anyone that lobbied for the Wilkes dogs to be killed (even little puppies they killed) needs to GO! H$U$ only changed their tune for self-preservation. While some good people undoubtedly work for them - GET PACELE OUT OF THERE!


so it's my personal, not-supported-by-fact opinion that what forced HSUS to change was the Wilkes case...and in particular the slaughter of the puppies (and maybe that little Internet tag many people put on their websites showing one of the babies that a rescuer was forced to give up on threat of arrest). No one could possibly believe those ittybitty babies could be irretrievably aggressive. I'm just betting Wayne got lots of angry calls from big donors. We know he has no principles, and IRT pit bulls HSUS along with PETA had been the leading proponent of slaughter. It could only have been the prospect of losing money that caused the change. So now, their tune has changed, and good for them. More than one person has testified that their work on the Ohio case has been exemplary (and they apparently did NOT participate in the dogfighting-to-catch-dogfighters scandal)


Emily -- agreed that HSUS changed with regards to the Wilkes case -- but I'd contend that without the Vick case, and even with the cute puppy photos, there wouldn't have been enough public outcry to make a difference. Maybe I'm wrong. But the Wilkes case was definitely the tipping point.

And I'm not sure who else you've heard feedback from on the Ohio case, but I would echo their sentiment and note that if every case like this is handled the same from here on out (at least, as of the details I know now), there will be no complaints from me.


Happy! Happy! That last shot of Edith reminds me of the picture of BAD RAP's Oklahoma Daisy on the braided rug :o)


The best thing that could happen to HSUS would be if the IRS shut them down and their money was distributed to decent rescues and shelters.

Social Mange

Sarah Barnett, how many of HSUS's millions of dollars is going to the rescues and fosters actually caring for these dogs?


EmilyS - exactly.

KMK - yep, the US could be no kill tomorrow with all that money.

SM - as many of their dollars as they will donate to help the homeless "puppy mill" dogs if Prop B passes in MO. In other words, NONE.

Lynn T

HSUS hasn't changed, but I do think that the last couple of years has caused them to back off on a few issues. Not that it makes any real difference - they have accomplished enough that unless people wake up and stop spreading their doctrine, they will meet their AR goals.

They can afford to back off a bit because they have succeeded in so much:

More people than ever are afraid of big dogs, particularly big, black dogs.

Almost all pet owners believe that the only good pet is a sterile pet.

Almost everybody believes that pet breeders are abusers, all across the board.

Corollary to the above - almost everybody believes that the only 'moral' way to acquire a pet is from a rescue or a shelter, thus effecting cutting off the market to the hobby breeders whose pets do NOT end up in shelters, by contract. The price isn't that different, but the knowledgeable, responsible breeders are being pushed out.

Almost everybody believes that animal agriculture is abusive by nature, though most people are resigned to the necessity. So far.

These positions are all AR positions, and all are designed to eliminate animal ownership by individuals, the first step in eliminating animal use and association with humans entirely.

HSUS is a vegan animal rights organization, and is not in any way friendly to animals. The vegan goal is to eliminate all animal products and animals from human lives. All ... food, clothing, companionship, exhibition, working animals. All.


This is a bit OT, but a friend of mine gave me a bunch of her old 'files' - animal related newspaper clippings, etc. I'm not sure what I did to deserve more paper in my house but some of this is amusing and some of it is nearly unbelievable!

There are some interesting things at first glance that would NEVER pass muster in today's world.

There's an article from 1980 from the Muskogee (OK) Daily Phoenix and Times-Democrat about the "horrible" Muskogee shelter - and there's a picture, a 5 by 7, of a small dog in the shelter (looks kind of like a JRT) that's been CHEWED IN HALF and a puppy is nipping at the carcass! Okay, that's "horrible".

There are several articles from the early 80s about attacks by pit bulls and other dogs. the early 80s was when the media started caring about dog bites. Before that time if you were bitten by a dog your parents spanked you because you must have done something to agitate the dog. Or, the person that owned the dog took care of the problem by taking the dog out back and disposing of it with acute lead poisoning. Those cases rarely made the paper.

Here's a good headline - "Baby-sitter grabbed girl from jaws of death", Winthrop MA, 1982. Dog was a Doberman.

Here's an article from 1982 from the Joplin (MO) Globe, "Boy's Ear Restored After Attack by Dog". They found the ear in the dog's stomach and reattached it to the kid's head.

here's a GREAT headline from 1982 from a publication only called "The Star". The article has no byline - 'Kittens and puppies are fed alive to fighting dogs for orgies of blood". (Thank you Randall Lockwood). There is a large photo (4 by 5) with a man trying to separate two pit bulls in a fight - it's pretty graphic. There is another man in the photo - but there's no credit on the photo, either. It says the men are police officers in Houston but they are in plain clothes. I wonder if this is that tabloid publication "The Star"? They encourage readers to send letters denouncing dog fighting and they'll send them to that venerable organization, the ASPCA.

There are several articles from farm publications where farmers warned about the evil HSUS. One article from Farm Talk (1982) has this quote: "Black maintained that unless farmer and agri-businessmen curb the flow of misinformation being distributed by those involved in the animal rights movement, the right to produce livestock and livestock products in confinement may be lost" - wow, I wonder if that guy is still around? He could get a job with Psychic Hotline.

There's an AP article from 1984, which is when Missouri passed their felony dog fighting law. One senator said the American Humane Society (sic?) "flat lied" to drum up support for the measure. It seems Sen. John Dennis, a Benton Democrat, got his shorts in a wad when "the Humane Society" showed a map of state counties where dog fighting had been documented. Scott County, where Dennis was the sheriff for 24 years, was on the map. Dennis insisted there was NO dogfighting in Scott County and he objected to the Humane Society's lies and "fund raising". :-)

Here's one from 1984 from "Off-Lead" magazine - anyone remember that obedience publication? "My Dog Was Banned in Cinncinnati" by Rosalyn Foreman - I believe that's Ozzie Foreman, who used to write for Front and Finish. She also has Newfs. (dog in article was an AmStaff - I believe she and her husband, Rick, unsuccessfully sued the city).

There's an article from 1984 - can't tell the publication, but is shows a pit bull in a 9.5 by 5 inch photo hooked to a hot walker (for horses) and he's chasing some sort of bait in a cage. I think that's a felony in all 50 states now, LOL.

My personal favorite is a 1983 article from Dog Fancy magazine, "Take a Stand: Is Organized Dogfighting Sport or Cruelty", by Lance R. McClouster. They have several pictures of dogs fighting (courtesy of HSUS - looks like they were taken from that Mexican footage we've all seen a million times) and then, as God is my witness there's a ballot where they ask readers to vote!

Sorry this was so long but I thought it was interesting.


Seems amazing that in 1983 Dog Fancy is trying to figure out if dog fighting is wrong or not. Sad really.

I wonder if "Black" is Baxter Black - -the old time Farm Talk Radio guy from out in Montana/Wyoming. He's a legend in Ag radio and I recently caught his Cowboy Radio show when I was out on vacation -- gotta say that it was pretty good.

Really wish the HSUS show and tell videos on dog fighting would go away.

And yes, this is all very off-topic.

These are cute dogs, no?


Absolutely cute dogs!

The cute dog pictures led to the HSUS discussion, which led to my post about the articles. I just thought it was kind of a testament to how times have changed in 30 years! Since you asked, "Black" is Neal Black, Executive Director of the Livestock Conservation Institute. Perhaps they're related?

I wish the HSUS show and tell videos would go away as well, but at least we haven't seen any 4 by 5 still photos in magazines lately!

Some of the questions on the Dog Fancy ballot are a riot, like "Have you ever been to an organized dogfight?".

There's another article about a dogfighting bust in Rhode Island, and they make a big deal about how it's in an unheated building "in the coldest part of Rhode Island". Gee, Rhode Island's huge - why didn't they move to the warmest part, LOL.

One of the funniest things is a publication by HSUS with ten points for getting legislation passed. I kept looking for "TELL HORRIBLE LIES" but didn't see it; however, there's a disclaimer at the end - "Federal law limits the amount of lobbying that tax-exempt organizations can do without endangering their tax-exempt status".

And on that note...I hope the absolutely cute dogs get adopted quickly! :-)

The comments to this entry are closed.