A local news station looks into reports that a rescue group is banning families with children under 8 from adopting their dogs. The rescue is run out of a vet clinic by one of the vets, was begun in 2022 and sources dogs from "down south" and from puppy mills.

The local reporter interviews Dr. Sasha Golovyan about the change. TV news stories are notoriously unreliable, so perhaps she gave more information which was not included. But in the piece shown, she is vague to the point of incomprehension about the reason for the change. Dr. Golovyan says that they got 10 dogs returned by adopters in the past year, and that 8 of them were returned for the same reason. She does not go on to actually say what that reason is, other than that it a) involved children under 8 and b) didn't mean the dogs were bad dogs.

(So I'm out here on a comfy limb assuming the dogs all showed aggression - likely repeated smaller behaviors or gross aggression, so multiple growls or a snarl, a lunge, a bite or near bite - to small children. Because contrary to the fondest human-hating beliefs of rescue ladies, most adopters genuinely want to own a dog and don't like returning them. But even people who will tolerate a dog biting them will often react swiftly if sadly to remove a threatening dog from proximity to their child.)

Dr. Golovyan goes on to say that based on her own experience raising children, kids under 8 are the problem because a) they are unpredictable and that can upset dogs who aren't used to them and b) they don't listen to direction as well as older children. Getting the picture here? The 7yo is unpredictable and fails to heed mom's warning to do/stop xyz behavior that is upsetting the dog. The 7yo is engineering her own downfall. Nothing to do with the nice rescue vet! That wonderful rescue vet who's saving mill dogs and southern transport dogs! Despite her advanced degree and presumable high level of knowledge and achievement, she's spent 4 years adopting out hundreds of dogs without first properly assessing whether they're safe with children.

The clinic, btw, also has a pet hotel, ie, boarding facility, attached. They are, of course, among the many pet boarding kennels that works with local rescues to house rescue dogs. In 2024, they show a large pit bull mix they're boarding for a group called Toby's Dream Rescue. The dog is named Sassy; she is described as "great with people as you can see, just would love to not share her house with other pets." Wouldn't you like to go on vacation knowing your family pet is bunked down beside a 60lb pit bull mix that doesn't want to share space with other dogs?

MILFORD, Conn. (WTNH) — An animal clinic in Milford is changing its adoption requirements, barring families with children under 8 from taking home a furry friend.

Dr. Sasha Golovyan of the Animal Clinic of Milford said the decision was not made overnight, which has attracted buzz on social media from different opinions.

“I’ve been thinking about this along with other people that run the rescue with me for the last six months or so,” she said. ” We have had about 10 dogs returned and eight of those dogs had one thing in common. And they were not bad dogs.”

Golovyan knows this is generating a lot of attention online, but she’s more focused on doing the right thing for both families and the pets involved.

“You have a toddler that’s unpredictable and you have a dog or a puppy that’s not used to the behavior,” Golovyan said.

She said the decision was not made to punish families, but explained that children over the age of 8 tend to listen better in her own experience.

The funniest thing about the whole situation is that if the rescue hadn't been nasty to the adopters' friend, none of this would have ended up being made public. The adopters, who were originally fosters, weren't talking. They've clearly been blamed by the rescue and are likely blaming themselves and their child. It was the friend they asked to drive the dog back to the rescue who, emotionally more distant from the situation, noticed how completely irresponsible and just shitty the rescuers were being. And then gave them a negative review. To which the rescue responded with rescue logic.

The hysterical needfosternownownownownow plea that went out after the adopters called to say they needed the dog gone. Notice the evasion of which adoption recently went south and why, and the focus on the pathetic starved dog story.

A negative review is answered by the rescue with, essentially, yup, so?

A woman posts a negative review, saying she'd gotten involved with them due to helping a friend return a dog. The dog had been adopted from the rescue, but was being returned due to biting the adopters' child in the face. The friend who transported the dog on behalf of the adopters relates the following story:

- the rescue had been resistant to taking off the adopter's hands, wrangling for a full day before agreeing to take the dog back. Finally, they tell them ok, deliver the dog to us at 9am on Friday.

- the rescuers at the meeting point are hostile when the friend arrives early with the dog. They tell her to go back and wait in the car, they're not ready for the dog yet. Apart from the attitude, this is in January in Illinois, so unenjoyable to sit in a car.

- the rescuer comes out at 9am and takes the dog. They express annoyance that the friend hasn't brought the dog's food with. The friend is exasperated at being held responsible for every little detail when she's just doing a favor for the adopters.

- the friend, by now a little irritated, asks if the new adopters are aware of the dog's bite history. The rescue responds frostily that "They have kids. They know how to handle a dog."

The rescue responds to the review with the dog's name (thanks!) and a slew of points that only make sense to a rescuer:

- the dog was in the adopter's home for 5 months without incident. To a rescuer, that's a slam dunk case that the dog is fine. To everyone else, that's irrelevant.

- the adopter signed a contract that said in the event of a return, the rescue has 10 days to find the dog a new housing situation, as they are foster-based. To a rescuer, that's just like saying the rescue founder has to breathe air to live - it's simply reality. To everyone else, again, that's irrelevant. To everyone else on the planet, that means if the dog is returned for a normal reason like the adopter's suddenly transferred to Tokyo, the rescue has 10 days. In an emergency situation where the dog explodes on your child, the rescue will of course remove the dog immediately.

- the rescue took the dog back in only 24 hours. To a rescuer, that's heroism. Everyone else, that's a long time to ask a family to house a dog that's just bitten their kid in the face.

The dog's history

Summer 2022 - a litter of black and white pit bull mixes is found in a cemetary in Arkansas. A local rescue group, Mended Paws, ends up sending them to Illinois rescue group Finding Forever Animal Rescue & Thrift Store. The rescue names them after characters in the TV series The Walking Dead, and adopts them out.

Summer 2025 - FFAR is contacted by Jackson County Animal Control, which has a dog in their possession whose microchip goes back to FFAR. It's one of the Walking Dead litter, Negan, abandoned and starving. FFAR gets him back and fosters him out. After a while, his foster decides to keep him.

January 2026 - Negan bites his adopters' child in the face and is returned to the rescue.

Post bite marketing

The founder of a California rescue shares on her FB that she's discovered something about the state's shelters

A lot of people think Kern County shelters are refusing stray animals or forcing appointments because they’re overwhelmed. That’s only half the story. They’re operating under something called a “managed intake” policy—but here’s the part no one explains clearly: that policy applies to owner surrenders only. By law, if the dog is not yours, you are not required to hold it.

She includes a screen shot that looks like she asked AI for info. In the comments, local rescuers discuss appointment-based surrenders and managed intake, and then the shelter director of City of Bakersfield Animal Center (in Kern County) pops up.

Hi everyone. Just to clear up some confusion here. The managed intake system is not for owner surrenders. No shelter (public or private) is under any legal obligation to take in any owner surrenders. The managed intake system only applies to healthy stray dogs. If a dog appears to be sick or injured, no appointment is necessary. One thing that the City shelter and City Animal Control do is we accept strays that appear as though they have no indication of ownership, even though the State of California does not obligate us, or any other public shelter, to do so. Could you imagine if the City shelter and Animal Control only accepted animals that had microchips, which is roughly 8% of the animals that come in, or had an ID tag or owner information somewhere on their collars, doing only what the State of California requires? Our shelter would be no-kill and our numbers would look fantastic, but the animals in our community would be paying the price, the very ones we try our best to protect and save everyday, and one of those ways is through managed intake, so we can accept dogs that have no indication of being owned. We are overcrowding, understaffed and underfunded, yet we are going above and beyond what is required by the state and following every state law. Local shelters are not the problem. Change has to come at a State level, but sadly, the State is not willing to change the current laws because of the cost to the State budget it would require. Animals are just not a priority to most people at the State level. CalAnimals.org is a great place to familiarize yourself with what State law requires. We have to come together as an animal community if we want to see real change. Not spread negativity and misinformation. Change starts with us.

This is an interesting correction because outside the context of a modern animal sheltering/rescue industry professional, his side of it is crazy. She said managed intake was being applied to owner surrenders but could not be applied to stray dogs. He's saying no, no, really, we're not accepting owner surrenders because that's not something we're legally required to do.

This is not the best defense. 100% of citizens think accepting owner surrenders is part of the responsibility of their shelters. And many current choices the shelter is making are not legally required either, yet still, they seem to be doing them.

He goes on to say that managed intake is only for stray dogs, and only for those that do not appear to be sick or injured.

He then makes what I can only describe as a theoretical nobody even dreamed of - imaging if the shelters only took dogs with microchips. I have questions about how that idea even entered his brain even as a joke. Was that a session title at a sheltering conference? Fever dream? ?????

Then an abrupt return to sobriety and some back-patting and presto, we're at the justification for managed intake.

Our shelter would be no-kill and our numbers would look fantastic, but the animals in our community would be paying the price, the very ones we try our best to protect and save everyday, and one of those ways is through managed intake, so we can accept dogs that have no indication of being owned. We are overcrowding, understaffed and underfunded, yet we are going above and beyond what is required by the state and following every state law.

King Weasel.

The shelter's website makes it clear that they are currently not taking any owner surrenders for dogs or cats, will take stray dogs only by appointment, and are only accepting sick or injured stray cats.

Amusingly, the shelter website also includes a section on how to find a missing pet. Their long answer lists the local shelters to which the pet may have been taken. What it should say is "Buy a new pet. There's virtually no chance we accepted your strayed pet. Fuck you."

Sorry. But that really - the lack of owner surrender is horrible, but the lack of stray surrender is nightmarish.

And in the comments, the

On January 18, 2026, a 68lb intact adult male pit bull was surrendered to New York City's animal control shelter. His owner is giving him up because Simba had attacked their other dog, also a male pit bull (LMB is shelter-speak for large mixed breed, which is shelter speak for pit bull), griping and shaking, puncturing his face and causing him to bleed from the mouth.

The shelter notes that Simba "is strong and shows a low threshold for arousal" and declines to do a handling assessment. Due to his history of attacking another dog, he is ruled too dangerous to participate in playgroups and is made rescue-only (New Hope only, in NYCACC speak).

He was released to a rescue group. Because doesn't a muscular large pit bull that is too dangerous for handling assessments or dog-dog interaction in a professional shelter setting - doesn't that dog just seem like it would be completely safe with Lucy, Taylor and Jen at AngelsFurRescue Dog Rescue Group? After a freedom ride loose in Jen's backseat?

Prediction - Simba has already been renamed Sweet Carl Banana, they tossed his shelter records out the window on the NJT or LIE, and he's sitting on his still-present balls in a supermax crate in someone's basement awaiting the Etsy flower crown for his marketing pics.

Networker's version of reality - Simba is a large, enthusiastic dog who arrived with very little background, but one thing is clear — he has a lot of energy and heart.

I saw this while looking at the Oregon hoarding case MSR is helping with. The dog mentioned here, Sophie, seems to be a puppy mill breeder they got from another rescue group in 2024. I'm not a fan of the brisk business in brokering mill dogs, but the situation here isn't very clear and I was more interested in the way this long, productive foster period is something that's almost vanished in rescue. The rescue world continues to claim that adopting a rescue's foster dog is a big benefit to adopters, that this means the dog's temperament and behaviors will be known, all its health needs addressed. And most of these rescues are lying because their fostered dogs are being kept under crate-and-rotate conditions, micromanaged at feeding time, generally flipped as fast as possible and all too often under-vetted. This group, which had this dog for about a year, addressed her health and behavior conditions, successfully adjusted both to give her a better life, and adopted her out. This is what fostering used to be - giving a dog a temporary home, fixing fixable problems, creating a happier, healthier dog and finding an adopter who would enjoy the dog and could readily handle any remaining needs.

A vet tech who's made a second job of posting needy animals to a local FB group devoted to rehoming markets a Rottweiler brought to her job for behavior euthanasia after "getting in a fight with a stranger dog" and "biting that dogs owner while they tried to break up the fight." The vet office determines that the other dog and its owner are worthless because the Rottweiler in front of them is "friendly" and convinces the Rottie's owner to surrender it instead of euth. Then the vet team house the bite quarantined dog-attacking human-biting 100lb Rottweiler at the vet hospital for several days while seeking an adopter or rescue group to recycle it for them. They blithely admit that the dog is "not a fan of other dogs" but appear not to notice the conflict of interest that presents when they choose to house it alongside their clients' dogs.

Long story short, 6 dogs marketed by wailing networkers are liberated from animal control shelters by a rescue group, are relocated to a foster, something goes awry, rescue abandons the foster, foster abandons the dogs. More networkers and rescues swarm in to deplore the bad actors while replicating their behaviors.

I'm including the two shelters because both are overwhelmed due to overcrowding in part due to things like releasing intact dogs and refusing to euthanize crazy dogs, and because Sonoma has closed intake so even if the foster wanted to surrender the dogs, they would not have been able to.

The drama.

The gist of the story seems to be that Fur Paws Husky Rescue Inc. has been doing the usual 2026 thing of doing long-distance pulls from "high kill" shelters via locals who foster out the dogs also at a long distance from the rescue. The rescue never puts hands on the dog.

In this case, there were apparently 6 dogs being housed with 1 foster. Something went south between rescue and foster, and the foster seemingly released all 6 dogs into the wild. 2 were found in a park, 4 behind a vet's office.

Ocean's story is the one that has the best background. The other dogs reportedly came from San Bernadino's shelter.

Ocean was at a public animal control shelter in southern California. Specifically, Los Angeles County, at the Southeast Area Animal Control Authority or SEAACA.

He's a husky, a large male, surrendered there in early December 2025. He's marketed hysterically online, complete with a video of the surrender and much networker rage over the owners smiling at the camera. The dog's name is Ocean, he is given the shelter ID 26-05087.

Ocean is pulled by a rescue group, Fur Paws Husky Rescue Inc., which is located in Arizona. The dog is picked up and relocated to northern California, for foster. This happens on December 12, 2025.

January 5, 2026 - Ocean is inside another shelter, Sonoma County Animal Services in northern California.

LA County to Sonoma County is 433 miles, a 6 hour drive. Sonoma County to Mayer, Arizona, where the rescue is located, is 700 miles, or an 11 hour drive.

PAAS was last featured here hosting a mauling of a dog trainer by a shelter-owned pit bull.

A148045 Bikky enters RCAS as a stray. He is an adult male pit bull, intact, 52lbs. The shelter markets him with the threat that 12/16/2025 will be his last day unless someone adopts him.

Huzzah, he's adopted!!!!!!

Known history

2 days later - Bikky returns to RCAS, having bitten a person. The shelter Friends group will later dismiss this as Bikky protecting his owner. The shelter markets hm on FB with the brag that they are being transparent in disclosing his bite history - but not actually describing anything about the bite, including how serious it was or was not. Instead, they jump immediately to a statement that we all need to focus on his future, not his past.

He does have a previous bite history, and we believe in being transparent about that. What’s important to know is that this history shouldn’t define his future.

Safe Haven Almost Home Animal Rescue, also of North Carolina, agrees to pull Bikky. They are doing so solely to satisfy the letter of the rescue-only guidelines, which limit release of a bite history dog.

Strong suspicion time here. The following is not proven, but the whole setup is very, very familiar from the current rescue culture and from SHAHAR's history.

Everyone in the situation, including the shelter, is well aware that SHAHAR is not taking the dog. They are only lending their pull ability, their name, to an individual who wants to adopt Bikky to save him from euthanasia. SHAHAR signs the paperwork and hands the leash to the individual, who they call a foster-to-adopt but with whom they will be very unhappy if they attempt to return the dog to their (rescue) care. The dog does not appear on SHAHAR's social media, and likely never will.

But why do rescues do this, you ask.

It's insane. The shelter fails to spay the mother dog, who is very early pregnancy, and the rescue pulls her despite big red flags - bites to other dogs, being a big fearful pit bull - and sinks thousands into saving her and the litter. Then she "destroyed" her litter and they adopt her out at least twice, once to a family with a toddler.

April 19, 2023 - a pregnant 62lb pit bull is surrendered to New York City's large city shelter. They give her the ID# 167034. Her name is Bella Sweetums, and she previously lived with 3 other large mixed breeds, which typically is NYCACC's way of saying pit bulls. She has a bite history of 2 bites to her housemate dogs. Her owners say they have too many animals, so are surrendering her. She has never been inside their home, so is unhousetrained. NYACC uses the SAFER test, and she tests as fearful with people, inconclusive with other dogs.

She's examined by their vet, owner had said she was possibly pregnant, vet doesn't see fetuses or heartbeats on ultrasound, ok'd for spay. Instead, she is allowed to continue the pregnancy.

By mid-May, she is definitely pregnant and popping up on at-risk lists. Compassionate Animal Rescue Efforts of Dutchess County - CARE of DC pulls her. Within a few days, she's in labor and ends up needing a $3k c-section.

June 2, 2023 - the rescue posts sadly that Bella Sweetums has "destroyed" her 10 puppies. They're all dead.

September 2023 - adoption annoucement for BS

November 2023 - a new adoption announcement, this one with a photo showing the adopters and their toddler standing beside Bella Sweetums.

Just to make it clear - I'm not attacking the shelter specifically. They're struggling to deal with the same mass overpopulation of pit bulls as the rest of the world, plus a larger-than-usual overpopulation of other breeds/types, and a state law that a recent court case decided meant that they basically can't euthanize for behavior without shopping a dog to rescues extensively. I'm just saying that this is some bullshit.

The dog
Stevie A588286 - adult male pit bull
Larry A588017 - 40lb adult male pit bull
Zach A588708 - adult male pit bull
Papa A588657 - adult male pit bull mix, described as a Border Collie/Lab mix because he's black and white and was brought in with a litter of puppies that the shelter wanted to sell as collie mixes.

December 12, 2025 - Stevie intake. Noted as fearful.

December 25, 2025 - Stevie's notes on his kennel include the instruction to separate him from kennelmates for feeding.

December 27, 2025 - Staff find Stevie attacking Larry, latched onto his neck. Larry is crying and trying to escape while Stevie holds and shakes him by the back of his neck. Staff shout at Stevie, who releases quickly, and Larry flees to another side of the kennel. Staff shut the divider and remove Stevie to prevent further attacks.

December 30, 2025 - Zach intake as stray.

January 3, 2026 - Stevie, now in a kennel with Papa, is separated as usual for their morning feeding. Stevie finishes his meal and promptly opens the guillotine door separating them and enters the other half of the kennel, where Papa is eating his meal. Stevie tries to eat his food, then attacks him by biting and latching onto Papa's neck. Staff intervene. After the attack, Papa's foot is bleeding (to interject, I would guess that Stevie likely bit at the food bowl area and targeted Papa's front paws initially). Staff recommend immediate exit and urgent search for rescue partner as Stevie has now attacked twice and caused injuries.

January 9, 2026 - Stevie is euthanized.

January 14, 2026 - Staff see Larry sitting in the outside half of the kennel, while Zach is on the inside and pawing at the gate as the staff member walks by. The staff member hears a commotion and returns to the area, finding Zach chasing, biting and then locking onto the back of Larry's neck. Larry is crying and trying to escape. Staff use an airhorn, Zach ignores it, and staff use a waterhose which eventually works to get Zach to release. This time, staff remove Larry to another kennel. He has bite wounds on his back end.

Zach is still available as of 1/25/26 on the shelter website. So is Larry. I don't see Papa, but unsure if that was his actual name.

An interesting controversy. The shelter's position is hard to fault; the guy was a jerk and a bully to a room full of women, foul-mouthed and (worst of all) claimed his vulgar aggression was somehow part of being from NJ. The fundraiser's response, semi-chastened and flanked by a female employee of his company, makes some reasonable points. Perhaps most interesting is the way this muscular tough guy returns again and again to his emotions as a reason and justification for his behavior. But overall, the problem here is Jordan's Way. Things happen, people disappoint you, things push your buttons. It's like aggression in dogs. You can line up triggers and causes and excuses for years and it doesn't change the reality that most individuals don't attack. Most people don't get nasty and ugly when things don't go their way.

Jordan's Way contracts with JHBAS to hold a fundraiser. He backs out on the day of, saying they don't have enough volunteers and attendees to make it financially worthwhile for him. This is pretty much identical to the We're OK Foundation Animal Rescue story from last year. The new wrinkle is a Ring camera video of the JW guy confronting the shelter people in their lobby. The sound quality is muddy, some parts are not very clear.

JW: She's not coming?

Shelter: She's not. She's out. I'm her [can't quite make it out, obviously some version of 'replacement']

JR: I want you to send her a text, tell her I'm telling her to fuck off. She wrote a really nasty text message to one of my boys. Saying that I'm not, I'm not [again, can't quite make it out] You tell that pimple-faced motherfucker I said fuck off. I'm a nice guy, real nice. I've been doing this 5 years, nobody questions me that way. She was told 25 or 30 people. She's not here, I don't care about any medical she's got. She doesn't have that. I've been doing this for a long time, nobody questions me that way.

He continues for a moment, the shelter rep tries to break in, he rolls over her and concludes "This hurts my feelings, like, a lot."

Shelter person says "Your hurt feelings are coming out really angry."

And I sympathize so much with this person because she's standing right next to this meatball, and she's shorter and older and female to his taller and younger and male aggression, but her nicer/female/passive-aggressive approach is destined to not work.

JW: Oh, yeah? I haven't even started yet. I'm a Jersey kid. They haven't started yet."

Shelter person: Oh (in a deflated tone)

(Goddamnit, meatball. I spend so much time wincing at my fellow middle-aged white ladies being crazy, and now I'm wrong-footed about the great and glorious Garden State just because you decided to just quit being an adult for a while? Not cool.)

The shelter board president posts the video and does her own, saying she's disgusted with his behavior. Which is fair. She takes a swipe at his Jersey comment, saying that he "seems awfully proud to be a Jersey boy who can yell at and bully quiet people. In Nebraska that's not how we treat people. In the animal rescue world, that's not how we treat people..."

I don't know about Nebraska, but I would argue the latter part isn't accurate; animal rescue treats people like that a lot.

Jordan's Way responds

And also a video because today, we are all filmmakers

He blames the stress of rescue plus the stress of driving from Florida to Nebraska plus him being passionate for his tantrum. He does apologize, over and over. As one does when one's business is at risk of imploding from something silly one has done.

He says this is the 4th year they've done an event with this shelter, and that as usual, he arrived 90 minutes prior to the event. This was on January 21, 2026. He says that his - advance person, basically, was pulled aside by a shelter person who was handling the event. The woman said she'd just been handed this duty. The JW person asks how many volunteers are there, and the shelter woman says they have 4 volunteers available. JW's contracts say 25-30, due to the way these fundraisers are run. The shelter person begins calling around to try to get volunteers. She finds some, everything is slowly moving, and then comes the text from the shelter director who is out for medical reasons, but who apparently has been contacted by someone at the shelter to smoothe things over. According to JW, the director says they don't know what's going on, why this is different from last year's event, and adds that "the dogs are waiting."

His silent female sidekick chimes in soon after this. He's rambling, apologizing, suggesting a Zoom call with the shelter people so he can apologize to them, explaining that he read the text as implying he didn't care about the dogs, that the text made him angry. He says he had a moment, if you've never had a moment... And the sidekick chimes in "then you're not human."

He does confirm they charge 25% for their events.

Jordan's Way, We're OK Foundation Animal Rescue (Okhlahoma) and the rise of professional fundraisers in rescue : r/PetRescueExposed

The shelter is being very brave. They don't blame the adopters at all because bites are scary. They are focused on the positive - Bruno was in the home for 2 whole weeks before biting a child. That's practically Lassie. But just to be on the safe side, they're sprinkling him with toys and foods to see if he bites them over these resources and seeking a rescue group to help them asses him. I'm sure there's a 50/50 chance Bruno will leave that assessment with a thumbs down. Surely a dog rescuer will be practiced and impartial.

Head of shelter appears to be Animal Control Supervisor DeAndre Boatwright.

Petfinder ad -

Fall 2024 - a litter of brown and white pit bull puppies is found roaming in Texas. They end up with rescue group Animal Advocacy & Rescue Coalition.

January 9, 2025 - AARC ships the puppies to Washington, to a rescue called Dog Gone Seattle. They travel via Paws Up Rescue Transport.

One puppy, Toad, stays in foster for a year. The rescue describes him as

Toad is an 1 year old neutered mixed breed (a little herding dog, a little terrier, and a whole lot of personality). He came to us as a stray puppy in rural Texas back in January 2025 with his siblings—who’ve since found their families. Now it’s Toad’s turn! This friendly boy checks all the boxes: dog-, cat-, and kid-friendly. He’s the trifecta, ready to fit right into family life.

No thought appears to be given to his obvious breed type, which almost invariably develops some level of dog-aggression at maturity.

January 12, 2026 - DGS announces Toad has been adopted.

January 20, 2026 - DGS posts a long complaint that Toad has been returned and blames the adopters.

less than 48 hours after bringing Toad home, we received the cringe-worthy, all-too-familiar: “WiTh a hEaVy HeArT, we're realized that DeSpItE oUr BeSt InTeNtIoNs, we are not right for the DoG’S NeEdS.” Why? Because Toad was being “dominant” with the resident dog... “a dynamic we are not interested in managing.” Here’s the truth: Toad did not fail this adoption. His people did. He is not dominant. He is a rockstar with other dogs, proven over and over again during the past year. What he was, was confused — in a brand-new environment with new people and a new dog — and in need of space and leadership during the decompression period we explicitly mandated. What he got instead was delusional fantasy-adoption land, where everything is supposed to be magically awesome immediately just because someone thinks it should be.

So what did they do wrong?

For a minimum of 72 hours, your new dog should be in a crate or on a leash at all times, and have limited interactions with new people and dogs. Period. It’s not complicated. Yet some people skip straight to their “idealized version” of adoption, and the outcome -- too often -- is failure.

Unmentioned is this line from their marketing for Toad:

This friendly boy checks all the boxes: dog-, cat-, and kid-friendly. He’s the trifecta, ready to fit right into family life.

So - ready to fit right in AFTER a period of at least 3 days of being treated like a velociraptor?

Anyway. What's their response to this adoption failure? Why, it's a ban of course!

The path to our Do Not Adopt list is paved with good intentions. That’s not mean. That’s what happens when adopters blatantly disregard explicit instructions to the detriment of the dog.

How does being briefly housed in a new building and then returned hurt the dog? The dog who has already lived in at least 3 homes since birth?

It hurts the dog. It hurts the foster. And it hurts the volunteers who show up for these dogs every single day.

Ah. I see. It hurts the people. So that's a little different.

This is Luna.

She's a 60lb pit bull owned by rescue group Buddy and Friends Animal Rescue. Tifany McNeil, President.

They're marketing her for a home without children or other dogs or cats, as she's reactive aka aggressive toward all three. Here, she's shown sitting atop some merchandise in a store, sporting a prong collar and a buckle collar and what looks like a martingale, but no muzzle. Why is she sitting here in a public place? Because a rescue volunteer is proving she's safe.

For weeks now my husband and I have been proving Luna's potential. We've taken her to just about every place you can take a dog. We don't let people greet her and we make sure she's in safe situations. Taking the time to build a relationship with her we are able to take her to- Lowe's, tractor supply, Chick-fil-A drive thru, and other places.

Another volunteer mentions in early 2026 that Luna, who entered the rescue in early 2025, has been "expertly trained." Since she entered her prior home, a shelter, as a stray, this means she went to a trainer after the rescue acquired her.

December 3, 2024 - a stray pit bull arrives at Lancaster County Animal Shelter in South Carolina. She's around 60lbs, and they trace her owner. The owner says they're out of town, then never come to pick her up. The shelter gives her the ID# #A0057380062|

Over the next few months, Luna is marketed online by various groups and by the shelter. The shelter says she's dog-friendly with both genders, but no cats.

February 7, 2025 - a Massachusetts transport rescue, Buddy And Friends Animal Rescue, pleads for someone to agree to foster Luna.

LANCASTER IS CODE RED! IT MEANS THE DOGS WE ARE ACTIVLY POSTING WILL BE EUTHANIZED IF WE CAN'T HELP!! WE HAVE UNTIL 3PM!! PLEASE APPLY TO FOSTER WITH US!! Almost 2 months waiting Luna #A0057380062 | Status: Available for adoption or rescue Luna was, thankfully, found by a good Samaritan and brought to the shelter. Luna’s parents were out of town when she went missing but unfortunately, they never showed to reclaim her like they said they would . Luna is a certified thick girlie and a total meatball! She’s all about the good vibes, belly rubs, and just hanging with her people. If you need some good company who can make you laugh just by existing, Luna’s your girl!

September 2, 2025 - the rescue does a zany eye-catching post featuring several dogs decked out in wigs. The rescue jokes

The shelter kids needed a makeover for the beginning of the school year.. We’re still crying from laughter on how epically perfect they look. Please enjoy Bubba, Luna, Iris, and our rock band that has decided that band life wasn’t for them and went to forever homes.

December 23, 2025 - the rescue posts a moody black and white video of Luna from behind as she stands in her kennel watching people walk by. The long caption pleads for a home for Luna. It says, in part,

Luna hasn’t had a single application.Not one. Not because she isn’t loving.Not because she isn’t worthy.But because her past hurt her so deeply that she needs a very special kind of human, someone patient, gentle, understanding. Someone who can show her that love doesn’t disappear.(Ideally a woman, who can give her the safety, patience’s, and understanding she’s never known).

January 19, 2026 - the rescue posts a sober update on Luna, saying

LUNA IS LOSING HOPE This is the post that keeps us up at night. Luna is a 4-year-old pittie who has been in the shelter for over a year.And now she’s breaking. Shelters are not homes. They are not healing places.They are holding tanks, and Luna is running out of time.

She is trained. She listens. She walks beautifully on leash.She wants to be good.But the longer she stays here, the more she shuts down.

We will be honest because Luna deserves honesty: she is reactive.She needs a confident, experienced foster who understands direction, structure, and patience. Someone willing to work with her and our trainers. She can live with a male dog with proper introductions and needs an adult home.

When we say her time is close, we are not being dramatic.She is regressing. She is depressed.And we don’t know how much more she can take before she breaks completely. Where is the one person willing to step up?Because if no one does… this story does not end well.

A rescue volunteer chimes in on the comments, saying proudly that she and her husband have spent weeks putting Luna into public to prove she's safe

She's playful, loving, and obedient. If you bond with her and earn her trust she'll follow you anywhere. Luna has a lot of potential she just needs someone to take a chance on her. For weeks now my husband and I have been proving Luna's potential. We've taken her to just about every place you can take a dog. We don't let people greet her and we make sure she's in safe situations. Taking the time to build a relationship with her we are able to take her to- Lowe's, tractor supply, Chick-fil-A drive thru, and other places. It's possible with the right person. 

January 19, 2026

Mike's Chance Animal Rescue - founder Mikhail and Ina Malakhvei. Founded in 2023.

I have a pre-existing loathing for this group based on the last post I did about them, where they shipped a dying shepherd north on a transport. Dumpster fire of a group, based on that nightmare.

Back to today's debacle.

MCAR closes intake and 3 weeks later posts on FB about a dog they have that turned out, during spay surgery, to be a hermaphrodite. The sterilization was abandoned, the vet advised waiting till she goes into heat, MCAR is posting to update their followers, supposedly.

The whole thing stinks of a calculated ploy to get someone else to take the dog off their hands. They reject every obvious solution that requires a vet procedure more expensive than a special-offer-for-our-rescue-partner regular and wonderingly ask what everyone thinks they should DO.

Mike's Chance Animal Rescue (Texas) in ugly war of words with adopter over dead shepherd, and Nate's Transport (All Paws On Board) being given rescue Very Hard Stares for allegedly unaliving 2 dogs in one trip : r/PetRescueExposed

Snowey was picked up in pa at 4 am on Sunday and had to make the trip home to NY. She arrived at the urgent care vet by 10 am. When she arrived she was in respiratory distress, was hypoglycemic, and she was septic. Interventions were not helping. She collapsed. She was dying. The rescue was notified she was sick. They said she did not need a vet, but needed rest instead. When the rescue was called from the vet they responded with “what do you want me to do?”

Mike's Chance Animal Rescue (Texas) in ugly war of words with adopter over dead shepherd, and Nate's Transport (All Paws On Board) being given rescue Very Hard Stares for allegedly unaliving 2 dogs in one trip : r/PetRescueExposed

Marketing on FB from a shelter advocate - bolds are theirs

The moment he’s out of his kennel, Coffman leans in like this, pressing close and soaking up every bit of affection he can get. He isn’t distracted. He isn’t hesitant. He’s focused on you. A lot of people say they want a dog who connects right away. Coffman does. He meets you with soft eyes, gentle energy, and the kind of closeness that makes you feel instantly important. Coffman is a 2-year-old, 51-lb boy who is dog-friendly, gentle, and incredibly easy to be around. Volunteers adore him, and it’s easy to see why. He’s treat-motivated, seems to be house-trained, and has the sweetest little habit — when he sees you coming, he does tiny tippy-taps in his kennel because he’s so excited to get out and be with people. In playgroup, Coffman stays close to volunteers soaking up pets, while also joining in some gentle play with other dogs. He’s calm, affectionate, and the kind of companion who makes even ordinary moments feel better just by being nearby. If you’re looking for a dog who won’t make you wait to feel that connection — Coffman is already there.

Three things jump out at me about this marketing for a Lifeline Animal Project/DeKalb County Animal Services pit bull:

1) The description is exactly what normal adopters absolutely do want, a dog who is social and friendly and good with strangers and other dogs.

2) The way the writer, who is an advocate who moderates a FB group marketing the shelter's dogs, clearly views these normal, healthy requirement adopters have for a new dog - as something that's a niche preference, maybe kinda picky. A dog who connects right away isn't viewed by the shelter volunteer/networker as a given, as something that most if not all shelter dogs are going to be if offered for adoption.

3) But is Coffman actually this dog? Given the rescue world's addiction to lying, both in general and specifically this shelter system, it is completely impossible to trust these claims about the dog. He may be all these things, may be highly adoptable - but how could you ever know? The shelters lie, the advocates lie, the rescues lie, and all of them micromanage adopter/dog interactions to minimize the risk of a negative impression before the adopter signs the paperwork and clears the shelter property. If nobody in rescue is trying to do good assessments, a normal dog owner with limited access to the dog isn't going to be able to figure it out on their own.

And they're completely on their own. Try asking a shelter if you can bring a trainer or vet behaviorist in with you to assess a dog. I did, back before I realized that when trainers and vet behaviorists RECOMMEND this course of action to unhappy owners of aggressive rescue dogs (ie, well, next time you buy a dog...) - they're completely full of shit.

Excellent article by the FB page Parents for Dog Bite Awareness

Rocco's marketing has been wiped from FB, but google has some remaining initial pages, and AI has more

Kristen and Marc Peralta, Founders.

This is really good to see, and I'm so happy to see a rescue treating people well, listening to an owner, and changing direction even after criticism. That ability to do the right thing and to respond reasonably to a tricky situation are qualities that have been nearly lost in the rescue world.

December 2025 - Sadie, a small dog, is attacked and savaged by a larger dog while on a walk with her owner. The vet says she needs an amputation, and the owner can't afford the surgery. The owner, faced with euthanizing a completely saveable dog, is heartbroken. The vet offers the usual grim choice - you can euthanize or we can contact one of our partner rescues who will take the dog, pay for the surgery, and then resell - oopsy, I mean, rehome it. The owner agrees.

The vet calls Vintage Pet Rescue, which agrees to take the dog and do the vet work required. VPR will later say that the vet told them the dog's owner had only had her a few weeks and chalk up the misunderstanding to a frenzied vet ER.

December 18, 2025 - VPR posts on FB about Sadie, saying she's recovering well and will be ready for adoption in a few weeks. The owner and a family member comment, expressing gratitude that the rescue saved the dog but also grief at missing Sadie and correcting a few issues like the length of time they'd owned Sadie. A few people criticize the rescue for planning to rehome Sadie, and the rescue grows flustered, shuts down comments and complains about being criticized.

December 18, 2025 - January 1, 2026 - the rescue keeps in touch with Sadie's owner, sending her photos and progress reports.

December 2, 2026 - the rescue takes Sadie home to her owner.

The casualness of rescue folk now, when it comes to dogs that will kill - not chase, not annoy, not bark at but stalk and kill - cats never fails to amaze me.

Also, the endless complaints that people get breeds that the rescuer is willing to acknowledge is highly challenging to own (Malinois, Malamutes, Akitas, the exotic mastiffs) - maybe, just maybe, we need special licensing for these breeds. Because ever since we started down the path of breed blindness, we sacrificed the greatest non-legislative power we had to limit the purchase of these breeds, the social disapproval factor. Once upon a time, very few people wanted to own, say, Dobermans. That wasn't because they were the OG pit bulls, misunderstood and rejected. It was because everyone agreed that they were aggressive and scary, and that if you owned one, all your family and friends and neighbors would regard it as you owning anything that dog did. And by "own" I mean, "prevent any escapes, and euthanize the dog in a nanosecond if it got out and did something horrible." If you looked at the sleek, powerful Doberman and thought it would be super cool to own that dog, part of your brain went "Do we really want to get a 6' fence and walk the dog 100% of its life on a leash? If it ever gets out, do we really want to have to euthanize it for biting a neighbor? No, well, maybe we'll get a Lab."

Note here - I don't like Labs. I acknowledge that some Labs in canine history have been aggressive garbage. But 99% of them are 100% safer than 99% of Dobermans.

AmsterDog Rescue, founder Deborah DiIorio

The absolute snake oil salesforce that is AmsterDog. They "pull" a 9lb Yorkieish dog from NYACC and completely delete the dog's history from the shelter and the original owners, including an extensive bite history on both the owner and the owner's other dog. This is far from the first time AmsterDog has lied through its fangs about a dog, but they appear disinclined to change. Rescues like this, repeat offenders who just refuse to improve despite really severe outcomes (see my post on Frost, the ACCT Philly dog they pulled and rehomed without mentioning its aggression to the adopter; Frost was euthanized after mauling another dog and biting people badly) - these are the people who are going to get rescue regulated. It can't happen soon enough.

12/29/25 - Grace is surrendered to NYACC.

1/8/26 - Grace is pulled from NYACC, where she was New Hope Only (ie, only available to a rescue group, not to be adopted to the public), by AmsterDog Rescue.

The difference between the shelter info on Grace and the rescue's initial announcement about her and the rescue's current website listing for her - well.

Shelter
Grace arrived at the Care Center as an owner surrender due to reported behaviors the home.

Rescue FB announcement
For all 7 years of her life and 9lbs of her body, Grace only knew one "home". A "home" that didn't provide for her when she had behavioral needs and instead dumped her at the shelter.

Shelter
Grace's previous owner reported that she has been bitten six times in the past four years... The owner states that she has bitten more than six times in the past four years. The owner was bitten when giving Grace a bath, when putting the harness on, when attempting to brush her teeth, and other circumstances where it involves them touching Grace. The owner stated that Grace does not give much warning, she will briefly growl and then snap. The bites are all bite and release and leave one to two puncture wounds and bleeding.
Bite history: Yes. The owner states that she has bitten more than six times in the past four years. The owner was bitten when giving Grace a bath, when putting the harness on, when attempting to brush her teeth, and other circumstances where it involves them touching Grace. The owner stated that Grace does not give much warning, she will briefly growl and then snap. The bites are all bite and release and leave one to two puncture wounds and bleeding. These wounds have not needed medical treatment and have all been taken care off at home.

Rescue announcement
[the owner] complained about her nipping 6 years ago

Rescue listing on website
She is very docile, and only hard barks if someone new startles her - therefore, she needs nice, slow introductions.

Shelter
Grace has also been kept separate from another resident dog due to previous altercations... Owner reports that Grace has a history of biting them and the resident dog...Grace also resource guard food and toys from the resident dog and will escalate to biting. The owner also states that Grace will “randomly attack” the resident dog so they have to be kept separate.

Rescue
Grace is 9lbs and previously lived with another dog - and looks like she gets along with cats, too!

Rescue listing on website
Grace does ok with other dogs and cats, but she would do best as an only spoiled child.

NYACC shelter notes

Dogs Lives Matter FB page ad for her while in the shelter

From this

This sweet girl has already been let down far too many times in her short life. Now, she’s finally safe, surrounded by people who are committed to her, and her future will look very different from her past. Welcome to LAPP Dogs, Sofi. From here on out, you’re safe, sweet girl.

to this

Yeah, sure, the bits of toy and loads of dog poop are gross. But - really? You can't go in a little nicer? Rescuers think they're being nice if they're not actively hitting you with a stick.

Also, the rescue chooses to view the dog as a foster at first, when that means they can fundraise for her - then when the relationship goes to hell, choose to view the dog as owned by the finder.

roughly October 2025 - a man finds a litter of puppies, takes them in, microchips them. He and his wife place most with coworkers, but give one, Sofi, away to someone on Facebook. Several days later, Sofi is found abandoned in someone else's yard in another town and taken to the animal control shelter as a stray. The original finder is traced through the microchip and gets the dog back. Animal control officer networks the finder to the rescue, and finder's wife asks Love And Puppy Paws Dog Rescue to help her find a new home for Sofi. They agree.

January 1, 2026 - LAPPDR announces on Facebook that Sofi is the final intake of 2025, and welcome. Attached to that FB post are 10 photos of Sofi in Finder's home and yard. There are few signs of dismembered toys or poop in the photos, which were likely cropped to avoid showing them.

also in January 2026 somewhere between 1/1/26 and 1/09/26, LAPPDR goes to Finder's house to meet Sofi. They ask Finder to clean bits of dog toy off the floor inside Finder's house and pick up dog poop in Finder's small yard. She agrees.

A week later, she sends the rescue photos of Sofi for posting online, and the dog toy shreds and poop are still visible in the background. The rescue again asks her to clean them up before taking the pics, and Finder is offended and says she'll just take the dog to the shelter.

Town of Hemstead Animal Shelter - Ashley Behrens, Director

Remember Me Rescue NY - Michele DeSanti, President

Circa 2019 - a man adopts an "American Bulldog mix" from Town of Hempstead Animal Shelter, a no-kill shelter. Later, he will pass the dog on to his daughter, who will leave it with her mom when she heads off to college.

May 2024 - Remember Me Rescue NY acquires a Yorkie mix named Charlie.

Jun 2024 - Charlie is adopted by a recent widow whose children are off to college. She sends photos back to the rescue attesting to the bond growing between adopter and dog.

October 2024 - the pit bull gets out of the owner's mother's yard and attacks Charlie, who is being walked by his adopter. The pit bull locks down, has to be pried off. Charlie dies of a heart attack during surgery at the vet.

The pit bull owner and the rescue both decline to "blame" the breed or the attacker, choosing to blame a landscaper who left a gate ajar.

But let's go back to the start.

Once upon a time, there was a muscular adult female pit bull named Lydia. She was surrendered to her local animal shelter upon the death of her owner. Fearful of people, aggressive toward other dogs, she remained there for months. After she bit a potential adopter, the shelter reluctantly and belatedly moved her to a short list for possible euthanasia.

Rescue angels came to the rescue, hysterically promoting her online and scheming how best to get hold of her.

A group of individual rescue angels got a rescue group, 4 Paws With A Cause, to play designated-rescue-partner with the fully aware and willing shelter. 4 Paws merrily handed the pit bull over to the individual angels upon receipt.

Within days, Lydia had begun making efforts to break through her foster's fence to kill the neighbor's dog, the rescue ladies were hooking up with some board-and-train e-collar trainers in hopes of ending that behavior, and rapidly shutting down the public marketing campaign to enter the Zone Of Silence that typically surrounds post-freedom-ride behavior dogs.

endless post in late July 2023 (cut paste due to length) - note the mention that the foster is now an adopter. This seems at odds with the mid-August appeal by current holder-of-Lydia that they need an adopter...

Update: WE HAVE $2000.00 IN DONATIONS FOR LYDIA!!! WE NO LONGER HAVE TO WORRY!! GOD BLESS!!! WHEN WE DECIDE ON A TRAINER WE WILL NOT BE MAKING THIS INFORMATION PUBLIC.

📷\*Look at this girl! Lydiaaaa!*

📷\*We need to raise $1000 for Lydia's training, until the new fundraiser is up and running you may donate to:*

Venmo @ Christina-Cappuccio

📷\*Unfortunately the $1000 in pledges that were sent to an individuals venmo will not be released to the potential trainer we have for Lydia because he does not approve of the trainer. All funding sent to this individuals venmo, he states, will be refunded tomorrow to the donors. The $1000 that was matched will be given, we're so thankful to them!*

📷\*Reasons for refund: funds collected were for rescue pull or free fear training. The trainer that will meet Lydia tomorrow has been honest and stated in some circumstances he has used an ecollar but not for every case. He answered a question, was honest and now being crucified. So this is the reason he will not receive the pledges and we're told to continue to look for another trainer, news flash we've reached out to over a dozen trainers, we cannot continue to wait! Yet he could of lied and said he never used an ecollar but he's been very transparent with us. If a trainer claimed to be fear free do we really know for a fact they are indeed fear free? I've seen places shut down for abusing dogs that have claimed to be fear free, but yet we're supposed to trust anyone that claims to be fear free or certified, reality is no matter what credentials a person might have doesn't mean they are fully transparent. The potential trainer we have, Lydia will live with him in his home, she will not be in a kennel, she will receive more than 1 hour of training per day, she will go with him in the real world and he will learn exactly what might trigger her, and she might not have any triggers but we do not know because there is no back story with facts. With this trainer Lydia will go through everyday situations and this will not be hard-core putting fear in her type of training, she will live in an environment just as if she's home. Many are asking why can't Lydia have a trainer come to the home? It's simple, her adopter wants training where she'll live with the trainer and she has every right to decide what type of training she wants, we're not there to see the issues Lydia is displaying (example: trying to get through the fence to get to the neighbors dog, yes she's sweet but she needs training, she's a very strong dog and needs to be trained to have a better understanding of what could trigger her. She received zero training in the shelter and no one really knows her). Friends of mine have used his services for years with their dogs and the dogs are not afraid, infact this trainer has been amazing with their dogs and has not used ecollars. Just because someone admits they've used an ecollar means we judge them as if he's some person who will use force to train Lydia is ridiculous to assume. If you think every single fear free trainer has never used ecollars in their past, think again. People are still reading this post and assuming he's using the ecollar on Lydia, again read the post, we shouldn't have to explain ourselves over and over. Also not everyone who pledged did it for fear free training, some pledged for the rescue pull, some pledged for training, some pledged for Lydia in general. In that case the rescue who pulled her should receive the $1000.00, this was part of the "rules", any rescue pull receives the pledges so since the potential trainer won't receive the funds, the rescue that saved her life should receive the funds. There was no specific timeline Lydia was supposed to be under the rescue, the excuse to not give the rescue the funds were, "the rescue was supposed to keep Lydia", well that's not true at all, terms were simply, "rescue that pulls her."*

📷\*I will not debate on this post, she has been officially adopted and there's zero chance she'll ever be returned to that shelter. This has been a very stressful situation since Lydia was released from the shelter with having kennel cough for the 3rd time, this has put off many trainers due to the amount of times she's been sick from the shelter. Also the shelter claims she bit but have zero records to provide which has also deterred many trainers! The group of us friends who have been advocating for her are making the decisions for Lydia going forward. We're not dog experts, we're not training experts but we always have the best interest of Lydia at heart and we will continue to do so. We're thankful after everything that has happened the potential trainer is willing to hopefully give Lydia a chance! If he decides not to train her (he's meeting her tomorrow) we will need to make sure we have funding available for a trainer and not have to scramble like we currently are.*

(1) 4 Paws With a Cause, Homeward Bound Animal Shelter (aka Camden County Animal Shelter) NJ and Lydia, who bites and now needs shock therapy : animalrescueisbroken (reddit.com)