When a breeder or rescue ‘adopts’ an animal to a new owner that is a complete and total transfer of ownership.The breeder/rescue gives up all legal right to the animal.In the event that we experience a situation where co-ownership is alleged, we will be sure to provide any party with an established ownership interest the opportunity to redeem his/her pet from our care.The takeaway from the DACC’s newest mouthpiece is that the DACC is NOT going to feel particularly obligated to return responsible rescue organizations’ pets to them should they be impounded.The breeder/rescue should be treated like any other member of the public and allowed the same opportunity for adoption, but no more.The DACC’s attempt to abridge the ownership rights of pet ownership is not only disingenuous it violates the law.This may or may not be connected to a ‘right of first refusal’ clause in the adoption contract.Just like the clause in the contract, being listed as a secondary contact is not evidence of ownership.
…Breeders and rescues will sometimes also list themselves as the secondary contact with a microchip company.We would be remiss if we did not also mention that Barnette has directed her officers to stop impounding tethered animals and strays – so that her numbers look better.Meanwhile Marcia Mayeda has taken a different tact.Meanwhile in Los Angeles there are no large scale publicly subsidized spay/neuter programs.Our low income population has extremely limited if any access to low cost spay/neuter services – and Los Angeles shelters are full and pets are being euthanized every day in both the City and County shelters – despite Los Angeles City’s Brenda Barnette’s recent disingenuous press release claiming Trumpesquely that her department is now “no-kill”. Barnette says achieving a 90 percent live release rate makes Los Angeles no-kill – which is the equivalent of claiming that one is a vegetarian because they only eat meat on weekends.
Search for lie backdating:
Allegedly racial slurs, using the County’s gas credit card to fill the manager’s private car and other offences are the basis for the recommendation.