Bring Brew Home

[Chris21711]

Originally Posted by Winston

Y'all are insane in the membrane, I'm out!

Thank GOD! we dont need anymore negative comments!~

Cindy

I second that.

[Love4himies]

Originally Posted by mmonroe

HOW CAN YOU PEOPLE KEEP BLAMING A CHILD! WHAT IF HE HAPPENS ACROSS THIS WEBSITE. IT IS NOT HIS FAULT! Sorry to yell, but, I find it extremely heartless to continue reading about excuses, especially ones about children. A supportive person would consider that this dragging on is only giving Kelly's children false hope, rather than helping with the mourning process.

I think what people are trying to say is Brew is lost because a child of 11 put out the dog, forgot about it, so the law shouldn't apply to them. Also, according to Kelly, she could not get the correct answers from the town (they don't know where stray dogs are brought to) so once again the law shouldn't apply to her. If so, is that an excuse that we can all use to get out pets back if they have been adopted out by a shelter and/or initiate legal action? I guess we all have the right to initiate legal action, that is a wonderful right we have in this society.

I too was thinking how sad it is to keep pointing out that it was an 11 year old who put out the dog, rather than the fact proper safety procedures weren't enforced in the house by the adults(dog never goes outside free).

What I find very strange is that this is a tiny town, Brew was well known to all and liked by all, according to Kelly, why didn't the people who found him just call Kelly? He was only out for an hour in -50, how far could he have roamed?

As for Brew being able to make the decision on where to live. How would we ever know? He can't talk and does he really know what is best for him? There is no doubt that Brew is loved and missed by Kelly and her family very, very much so. He looks like a wonderful dog and the new family probably love him very much too.

As for the family who adopted Brew, if I was them, I wouldn't contact kelly with a 10 foot pole after the threat of a lawsuit. I would be calling my lawyer.

I haven't seen a copy of the article, but that would be the best place (in my veiw) to view the facts to get a logical prospective of this story, since it seems AC, the Brandon Pound, and Kelly have all been interviewed.

[Love4himies]

Originally Posted by mona_b

And what are they supposed to do?Seriously?They don't have time for little things like that.


Don't give up.And if you need some suggestions,feel free to pm me..I will help with what I can...

In rural areas, the local police are wonderful and are full of information. When I had an injured deer in my yard and had no clue who to call, they passed on info on where I can try to find help for it and did come out to my yard, but their hands were tied legally on what they could do, understandably so.

Yes, they are very busy, but it is the office you call (not 911 for anybody who thinks that is who you call) for info, not to ask them to look for it.

[happycats]

I cannot read the story becasue you have to be a subscriber ?
this is as close as i can get. (see the last line,"Family shocked by missing pet’s adoption" )

http://www.brandonsun.com/local.php

[Love4himies]

Originally Posted by happycats

I cannot read the story becasue you have to be a subscriber ?
this is as close as i can get. (see the last line,"Family shocked by missing pet’s adoption" )

http://www.brandonsun.com/local.php

I tried too, have e-mailed Brandon Sun.

[Elizabeth Ann]

(I have read this thread from start to finish. I have read each and every post before I posted for myself)

A couple weekends ago my boyfriend and my best friend thru me a birthday party. Both Tonka and Eddie were safely tucked up in the master bedroom** and Gizmo got to party with the humans.

While one of the last guess were leaving Gizmo bolted out the front door which he has NEVER done before. He has always been very good at keeping his distance from the door while he is saying good bye to guests.

I was upstairs at the time, so Mark came running upstairs and said “I lost Gizmo”. My heart dropped and I immediately started to cry. I asked him if he was joking (not that he would joke about something like that but I didn’t want to believe it was true). When he convinced me that in fact he had lost Gizmo I ran outside with no coat or even shoes. I was in complete hysterics and just wondered my townhouse complex, calling Gizmo’s name. Because we live on the corner of two very busy streets I was trying to keep my ears open for any cars breaking quickly as I thought that would be a sign as to where Gizmo was.

The good news is Gizmo never left the complex and Mark found him two rows over. Apparently Mark saw him and Gizmo ran to him just as fast as he ran out the door.

I still get a little teary thinking of what could have been.

My point is, Gizmo is my child and because I almost lost him I know how it feels. I am pretty sure that I would be doing everything in my power to get him back. I also know that as hard as it would be I would want the new owners to give him back.

I just want you all of you that are saying what Kelly is doing is wrong to put yourself in her shoes. Just think how you would feel if you lost your beloved dog or cat. She knows that it was her error that got her into this situation in the first place but she is trying to make it right. Maybe suing isn’t the correct avenue for her to take but she had only mentioned that briefly and it may have been said completely out of frustration.

Note: I am normally a devils advocate in most situations. And normally I wouldn’t even post in a thread that is so emotionally charged such as this one but it has brought tears to my eyes and I couldn’t hold back any longer.




**Eddie doesn’t do well with crowds since she has gone blind, and we don’t 100% trust Tonka not to snap at some one yet.

[danaekitty]

So many people in this thread are STILL throwing blame around.
Who cares who is at fault? Things have happened in this woman's life that we, as mere posters on a forum, have no control over and shouldn't necessarily judge. These things cannot be undone. MORE things are going to happen that again, we as forum members cannot control the outcome of by judging and blaming and throwing the same posts up over and over but phrased differently. We are simply people following an interesting story and waiting for updates from concerned parties.

I just think that we, as a group, should realize that we don't really have any control over Kelly's situation. I am literally reading the same opinions over and over... very frustrating, as I have subscribed to this thread in hopes that I would get an update every now and then. I'm definitely not getting that. I'm getting a bunch of people arguing amongst themselves and with the O.P. about things that were said and repeated ages ago. And AS someone who is actually reading every single post waiting for an update, this is annoying.

I'm glad at least that some of us are able to express our opinions and suggestions without judgement or finger pointing, even if those opinions are not in Kelly's favour.

[CearaQC]

I want to read the article.

Maybe someone in the area that receives that paper can make a scan of it? Or maybe retype the article on here?

[CyberKitten]

Admittedly, I had time only to read the first page and some of this one. IF the dog - Brew - is still with the new family and you are the legal owner (with registration et al), I would contact a lawyer and see what I could do. I would also go to the media because the association should have tried to locate you. Yes, I know there was no ID which is not good - and it is not the fault of an 11 yr old. Of course his video game is more enticing. I lost my poodle once (when I HAD a poodle, yrs ago)- he was gone for a night and I spent the entire evening until I found him. (he was coming up the road though - back home).

So, I would have several articles written and I would even hire a pet detective to search for Brew. You are his family and in my opinion, the legal owners. These types of situations do occur from time to time but surely the Humane Society, seeing Brew, must have known he had a family and they must have advertised in the local Brandon Newspaper (Even our HS does this - and they are not the best).

There are complications I understand- you are new to the area but surely this family and the HS must understand this. I would contact the city council of Brandon or the mayor and ask what is going on and why you have to go through this. It will be diffiocult I am sure for the other family but they have only had him for a short time and he is NOT their dog. Surely they can understand that!

Good luck!!! I am sorry you have to live thru this!

I had another thought - does this HS have a Board? When are their monthly meetings? Can you talk to them? I would definitely get a lawyer and talk to them. They cannot allow another family to keep your dog.

[Love4himies]

So to all of you who feel Kelly should get her dog back:

How long do you think a stray should be kept at the shelter before it is adopted out?

Should there be a clause in all adoptions that the pet is not really your pet just in case the original owners claim it?

[Winston]

Could we not just leave it to say that it doesnt matter what we think about Kelly and whether she should get her dog back or not? really this is about a comedy of errors (sorry to put it that way!) but their were mistakes made, admitted too!, misinformation on the part of the agency's or places she made contact with!!

This should be about Brew and not how places are run. Maybe a new thread should be started for that debate!

I have asked this question before. What if something tragic happened and a dog owner is seperated from its dog as a result of this event. The owner doesnt know any better. The dog is captured. Taken to a AC or whatever facility. Two or three weeks later the dog is adopted to a new loving home. You recover and wonder where your dog is. You find out that is adopted and you want your dog back....Do you think this person is wrong in wanting their dog back? I think sometimes their are circumstances where some compassion should be shown. This would be one type of example.

But this needs to be about Brew!

Kelly I hope things are better today! Sending good thoughts your way!

Cindy

[coppperbelle]

[QUOTE=Love4himies;569487]So to all of you who feel Kelly should get her dog back:

How long do you think a stray should be kept at the shelter before it is adopted out?

Should there be a clause in all adoptions that the pet is not really your pet just in case the original owners claim it?[/QUOTE

I don't think anyone is asking that shelters change their rules or that some clause that makes absolutely no sense be put into an adoption contract. There are times however when rules have to be bent because not everything is cut and dry. In this case Brew was in a shelter, a long way from where he went missing. He was kept the required amount of time and then put up for adoption. By the time Kelly found him he had only been in his new home for a few days. If his new family had been advised right away that Kelly was looking for him they may have made a difficult decision to return him. Of course they may not have and that would have been their choice. Now that this is in the media they will be put on the spot and will probably be bullied by some to return Brew. They are innocent of any wrongdoing and are the victims.

[CyberKitten]

I think the issue of who owns a "stray" which Brew never was is an entirely different issue and one best left not to the emotionally charged tone of this topic. I do see entirely too much blame and not one of us here can cast any stones. Are we all so perfect that nothing has ever happened to us? I sincerely doubt it!

As a pediatrician, I know how kids think and it upsets me to no end that there are adults on this forum who are ready to lynch this kid because he "forgot" about hos dog for an hour. I'm sorry but that is almost abusive. Yes, he should have done what he was asked but he's a CHILD!!!! They think very differently - read any medical journal you will see any number of studies demonstrating how the brains of children work- differently than adults. I do not ever want to hear anything else about this poor kid losing his dog! he has surely suffered enough!

I agree mistakes were made here but not everyone is as knowledgeable about finding and locating pets as many of us are on this site. I know I would have had posters printed the next day and travelled everywhere but in a panic and in a new community, it is hard to say what one might do. That is no longer the issue.

To many of us, our pets are our babies- just as Brew is for this family. Think if your child was lost or you placed your child in hospital or a day care center and another family claimed him or her. What would you do? Accept it? I do not think so. Of course there are more secure provisions in those institutions just as there should be at Humane Centers. I do not like the 72 hour hold SPCA's and some others have and I loathe kill centers which many of them are.

There have been similar incidents like this with differing legal results. It depends on various issues such as the time the family had the animal or whether the animal had been abused by his or her original family. In general though, the family who has the in this case- dog's registration papers and vet records is the owner - regardless of any action taken by any rescue group, however well meaning they were. They need to admit they were wrong and return Brew. It is that simple. Otherwise, they - like others before them - should be brought to court and made to return the dog to his rightful family. Yes, it is tough on the new family and yes, they may have saved the dog (One has no way of knowing that for sure) but the records of the rescue group - if they are registered as a Canadian Charity - need to be public and the information regarding this dog must by law be provided to his family. Providing less is an injustice and depending on the jurisdiction, illegal.

As a child, I went through a similar situation though not as traumatic. One of our black kittens, an adventurous character, managed to get into my mother's briefcase when she was going to work. (She was a school principal at the time and had a huge bag to carry stuff). The problem was she never saw him and he disappeared, much to our dismay. We placed posters, called the only vet of the day - an hour away in northern New Brunswick - canvassed our neighnourhood as well as that of the school (thinking it was possible but not really believing "Blackie" - named by my ten 5 year old brother - had made it to that part of the community which was a perhaps 5 km away. About two weeks later, there was a photo in the newspaper of a young child who attended the school on the front page of our local newspaper playing with his cat! It was Blackie!! We recognized him instantly. We called the family and they gave him back to us immediately, knowing full well this kitten was not theirs and while they would miss him, they knew he was someone else's. Today, that child- like my brother - is a firefighter , ironically. - and married to a friend of mine who is also a pediatrician. Small world.

I see this in the same way except more time has passed but not enough that a dog who has lived the vast majority of his life and likely feeling abandoned by his family is now in someone else's home. Since they have only had him a short while and the writer has offered to compensate them for any money spent on his care, I do not understand their keeping him. It defies logic and is unfair both to the family and the psychological health of the dog. I also do not at all at all - as the my Irish grandmother might say - understand this organization!

[Love4himies]

Not sure if Kelly has the ability to sue the pound:
Got this from the Manitoba Care Act:

Immunity from action

38 No action or proceeding may be commenced against the minister, the director, an agent of the director, an animal protection officer, a caregiver, or a member of a licence appeal board or an advisory committee for any act done in good faith in the performance or intended performance of a responsibility or in the exercise or intended exercise of an authorized action under this Act, or for any neglect or default in the performance of a responsibility or the exercise of an authorized action in good faith.

Here is another exerpt:

Companion animal may be sold

17(1) The director may sell, give away or destroy a companion animal that has been seized under subsection 9(1) if

(a) the director has provided a written notice to the owner of the animal that the animal will be sold, given away or destroyed;

(b) seven days have elapsed since a notice was provided to the owner under clause (a); and

(c) the owner of the animal has not delivered a notice of objection to the minister under subsection 18(1) and served a copy on the director.

Here is 9(1) which is referred to above:

Care or seizure of animal in distress

9(1) An animal protection officer who discovers an animal that the animal protection officer believes on reasonable grounds to be in distress may provide any care the animal protection officer considers necessary to relieve the animal's distress, or may seize the animal.

My point being we maybe shouldn't be giving Kelly any false hopes that she may be able to sue, it is not fair to her or to her family.

Here is an exerpt from Brandon City Bylaws:

16. No liability shall attach to the Animal Control Officer, to the Pound Agent, to the Pound Agent's
employees, to the City's employees or agents, or to the City for any dog or cat destroyed or injured while
being captured or seized, or during impoundment.
[AM. B/L 6171/20/94]

and:

(b) upon the expiration of seventy-two hours from the service of the notice under subsection 11(e), if
the dog or cat has not been redeemed by its owner, the Pound Agent shall be authorized to sell
the dog or cat for an amount sufficient to cover, where possible, all applicable impound fees as
set out in the City's annual fee schedule, and vaccination costs, but in no case shall a dog or cat
be released from the pound until a current City dog or cat license has been purchased for said
dog or cat.
[AM. B/L 6171/20/94; B/L 6603]

[luckypenny]

I don't know Love4himies . Depending on how this is interpreted, it could actually turn out in Kelly's favor (I have to mention, I don't recall Kelly saying she'll be suing the pound in particular, nor the adoptive family. I won't be guessing either).

Originally Posted by Love4himies

Got this from the Manitoba Care Act:
Immunity from action
38 No action or proceeding may be commenced against the minister, the director, an agent of the director, an animal protection officer, a caregiver, or a member of a licence appeal board or an advisory committee for any act done in good faith in the performance or intended performance of a responsibility or in the exercise or intended exercise of an authorized action under this Act, or for any neglect or default in the performance of a responsibility or the exercise of an authorized action in good faith.

Would the AC officer not submitting the ticket to city hall be considered an act carried out in good faith?

Originally Posted by Love4himies

Here is another exerpt:

Companion animal may be sold

17(1) The director may sell, give away or destroy a companion animal that has been seized under subsection 9(1) if

(a) the director has provided a written notice to the owner of the animal that the animal will be sold, given away or destroyed;

(b) seven days have elapsed since a notice was provided to the owner under clause (a); and

(c) the owner of the animal has not delivered a notice of objection to the minister under subsection 18(1) and served a copy on the director.

Not sure if this would apply at all. Kelly didn't receive any notices because the pound didn't know who the owner was .

Originally Posted by Love4himies

Here is an exerpt from Brandon City Bylaws:

16. No liability shall attach to the Animal Control Officer, to the Pound Agent, to the Pound Agent's
employees, to the City's employees or agents, or to the City for any dog or cat destroyed or injured while
being captured or seized, or during impoundment.
[AM. B/L 6171/20/94]

Doesn't apply either as the dog wasn't injured nor destroyed.

Originally Posted by Love4himies

and:

(b) upon the expiration of seventy-two hours from the service of the notice under subsection 11(e), if
the dog or cat has not been redeemed by its owner, the Pound Agent shall be authorized to sell
the dog or cat for an amount sufficient to cover, where possible, all applicable impound fees as
set out in the City's annual fee schedule, and vaccination costs, but in no case shall a dog or cat
be released from the pound until a current City dog or cat license has been purchased for said
dog or cat.
[AM. B/L 6171/20/94; B/L 6603]

This seems to be the only bylaw that offers some protection to the pound. However, it doesn't necessarily mean she's not entitled to get her dog back.

As horrible as I find it, I've seen instances (animal cruelty cases) where judges have sided with the original owners based on technicalities. In this situation, I'm guessing the fact that the AC didn't originally submit the ticket to the city can be considered a technicality in favor of Kelly.

In addition to my last comment, I don't think I've ever seen a law that states an animal is taken away permanently from it's family because it was errant. I understand a fine, but permanent removal? It's the first time the pound was involved, the AC officer didn't submit his ticket, and as a result, Kelly, after calling City Hall did not receive a report that her dog was found.

Originally Posted by Love4himies

My point being we maybe shouldn't be giving Kelly any false hopes that she may be able to sue, it is not fair to her or to her family.

Sounds to me like Kelly may indeed have a chance. I'm no lawyer but know enough that the law can be interpreted many different ways depending on the individual circumstances. Furthermore, laws are updated and/or changed all the time because someone decided to do something about it ie. legal action proceedings. Based on what Kelly had mentioned, sounds to me like the city she resides in is already considering changes.

[Love4himies]

Originally Posted by luckypenny

Would the AC officer not submitting the ticket to city hall be considered an act carried out in good faith?

That is the one issue that I have a problem with! I think it was extremely irresponsible for him not to. This is very tricky because you have a third party involved, an AC officer for one municipality, an impoundment for another municipality, then the owners. If there was nothing in the AC contract with the town stating he had to turn in his ticket by a certain time, can't sue AC, but can sue the town, I guess.

Is the purpose of the ticket to inform the town or is it to get paid for his services?

As for contacting the owner, how can you contact the owner if you have no idea who it is. I thought, not sure, somebody mentioned that Brew was on the found page of the bandon humane society . Wonder if that is why there is another line in the bylaws of Brandon (which is not where she is from so she would have to check those) that state the dog is to have his collar with tags on at all times, and owners shall not allow their dogs unrestrained off their property, so AC can locate the owners.

However, suing the pound, which is what I was talking about had nothing to do with the AC turning in the ticket. Two different municipalities. Because the pound is a third party and has no control over the AC from Carberry can a person still sue? I thought in one of my law classes I was told you couldn't.

I think I remember reading somewhere there is an appeal time for adoptions and seizures, but can't remember which act it was in.

As for no liability, I read that as an liability during impoundment

[luckypenny]

This is very tricky because you have a third party involved, an AC officer for one municipality, an impoundment for another municipality, then the owners. If there was nothing in the AC contract with the town stating he had to turn in his ticket by a certain time, can't sue AC, but can sue the town, I guess.

It would depend on who's signing his check I guess. If it's the town of Carberry, to a certain extent, they would be responsilbe for his actions, would they not? I know that if an employee makes an error, the employer can be held liable.

Is the purpose of the ticket to inform the town or is it to get paid for his services?

I would assume it's both.

As for contacting the owner, how can you contact the owner if you have no idea who it is.

Which is why I can't see how it can be applied in this case.

I thought, not sure, somebody mentioned that Brew was on the found page of the bandon humane society .

This is where I'm really confused. It's my understanding, I could be wrong, that there are three organizations in Brandon that deal with animal protection/control/adoption.

1) Brandon Humane Society/Better Dog Network and Humane Society (although listed as two separate organizations on this website, they seem to be one and the same) I was under the assumption they had nothing to do with this. http://www.adoptananimal.ca/search.php?prov=MB
2) Brandon Pound
3) Funds For Furry Friends

Apparently it was the pound who had Brew for the entire time but please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm curious to know who's website he was listed on?

Here's the link for the website that is supposed to take you to the Brandon Pound: http://www.fundsfurfriends.com/AtThePound.htm but if you read carefully, it's actually Funds For Furry Friends that owns the site ? If Brew was indeed posted on this site, how long after he came to the pound was he posted? After 3 days? 5? 2 weeks? Perhaps it's not even relevant if Kelly was never even directed to look here .

Wonder if that is why there is another line in the bylaws of Brandon (which is not where she is from so she would have to check those) that state the dog is to have his collar with tags on at all times, and owners shall not allow their dogs unrestrained off their property, so AC can locate the owners.

Again, I would assume so. But would this be punishable by removing the dog definately from it's home? Or simply a fine and/or warning?

However, suing the pound, which is what I was talking about had nothing to do with the AC turning in the ticket. Two different municipalities. Because the pound is a third party and has no control over the AC from Carberry can a person still sue?

It would help to know if the AC also has a contract with the Brandon Pound if that's where he was taking animals? Could be a case of two different municipalities with a contracted employee in common. Which then would make both towns responsible perhaps.

[mrthomas]

Originally Posted by shirley1011

MMONROE..the mourning process....this dog is not dead...he is alive somewhere..at least that is what would be nice for Kelly to know.

it has been stated the dog has been adopted and has a new family. what a goofy thing to say. kelly knows she doesnt care about that. she has indicated she wants the dog returned. truth be told if she put as much effort into finding him as she has in this posting board i think he would have been home.

this has gone so far out of control. this is not a lost dog or a found dog. he is a legally adopted dog who has new owners that saved his life. feel sorry for kelly if you want but i think the beat down on the new owners is mean and unfair. they did nothing wrong and if i were them i would not contact kelly either. read the posts here! after some of the comments made by kelly i doubt they will ever contact her.

[luckypenny]

Originally Posted by mrthomas

...feel sorry for kelly if you want but i think the beat down on the new owners is mean and unfair. they did nothing wrong...

Who is beating down on the adoptive family ? I don't recall anyone claiming they did anything wrong. In fact, it's quite the opposite. How unfair of you to state these false accusations!

[aslan]

Lp= this is when you need to go

[chico2]

NOBODY has any ill feelings towards the new owners,on the contrary,they did what they thought was a good thing in adopting Brew.
I believe Kelly is talking about a lawyer,not for the purpose of suing anyone,she needs some straight answers,wants to know if this pup is actually her Brew,wants to meet with the new owners and if she cannot get him back,she would want to see that he is happy where he is.
I know I would be ready to fight tooth and nail to get my dog back,6 yrs is more than half his lifetime,six yrs that he has spent with his family,who love him.
There are people here on this Forum who are worried day and night about beeing forced to return dogs they have brought back to health,if the judge decides to award them back to a puppy-miller.
I am hoping it does not go as far as the courts,I am sure Kelly does not want that either,but someone has to give her some answers,hopefully the new owners will come forward

[Kelly27]

Hello everyone....I briefly touched on some of the comments and very interesting....I have one thing to say as far as the city animal control bylaws...they wouldn't apply to me....i don't live there...it states that no animal can be released without getting a city tag....I don't need one...so if that can be bent .... they all can....know what I mean?....you cannot pick and choose the bylaws I fall under....there are no mandatory tagging laws here in Carberry....as far as what's been relayed to me anyways....hopefully that will change....

and as far as sueing like i said that is a definate last resort....quite frankly i'd offer the 2.5K i'd pay a lawyer to the family in Brandon if I could before I'd pay a lawyer....the posters I've put out do offer a reward but i don't state how much...

the article was disappointing...truthful, factful but limiting in the info being relayed....It really was the pound's side of the story more than anything....which is correct....what it left out was why Brew was at the pound so long without being picked up....but it does name the rural communities that pets are transported to Brandon pound from....so that's good....then again any publicity is good i say....

[Kelly27]

I'll see if I can get my scanner to work and post the article tonight....it's pretty old....hamster looks tired!

[Kelly27]

Gibbons you are correct nothing has ever been confirmed...we're running with the assumption that this is Brew...and for all those that keep saying how legal action could hurt the institutions involved, plse remember there are more parties involved than just me...and i'm only wanting to communicate. Yes if I have to I'll go to the next level but is it my fault for being persistant or others faults for being unwilling to communicate....for all I know the pound adopted him out to his brother-in-law, I don't know!...without truth nothing is certain and maybe just maybe the only way to get out all the facts and truths is through the courts....what could be horrible about the truth being told and judged accordingly?....why should I give up my love for my Brew to defend a system that has failed me?...

In any case I still hold out hope that this can be resolved soon...my time is running short though...

How can anyone assume that I don't have a legal leg to stand on?....are they a judge? a lawyer? so making an uninformed critisizing statement like that here is only in effort to stir the pot a little....not required....you think I haven't thought this through? you think I would volunteer to be put in a position like this? You think I would pursue this like I have If originally I was never even looking for my Brew? You think I take pride in the fact that another family is affected by all this? NO! I called the pound only days after he was adopted out...if this had been handled properly immediately there would have been few issues i'm sure....and believe me I requested the pound contact them that day!

[Kelly27]

Winston you rock! Let's say someone has there eye on a dog that they want....steal it but make it look like the dog broke his collar or make a hole in the fence....take it and tie it to the door of a shelter/pound in another area, wait 3-5 days then legally adopt it....what can the original owners do to reclaim their dog if somehow they find out he was at that shelter/pound at one time?

Is it probable this could happen, no...is it possible, yes. All cases must be heard on their individual merit. Did Brandon do anything wrong. Legally no. Was there a fair and clearly set up system for me to help me reconnect with my pup. No. There was a piece of the puzzle missing and info not relayed that was crucial. Even without all that I should have been given I still found him....just not in time...

to the new family, i'm not trying to guilt you or threaten you, some of the people here have tried to twist it here to make it appear as such....i've only tried to show that he is loved and some of the circumstances to how things became the way did. If there's people out there that don't like me standing up for myself...too bad...you should see me dance....

[Jim Hall]

Kelly Howis your boy doing is he feeling a bit better?

WHy cant you get confirmation that the dog is Brew they must at least know when he was brought to them and i woild think Brew had some kind of distingushing mark?

[gonefishin']

In 16 days I would have made my way to every pound in my area(I too live very rural, the mountains)and I would have driven to every town and looked in ever pound and shelter until I found her. Every where has At Large laws, regarding pets, otherwise we would quickly be overrun by feral dogs, and probably many auto accidents from motorists swerving from loved pets like the one discussed here. And my first phone call would be to my RCMP and local authorities. I see someone who has more time to sit on the internet complaining about a mistake, who knows what was occupying her for 16 days while she could have easily taken the time off work and driven to each pound and shelter, she would have found him. This is a beloved pet, as she puts it, and the military would have alloted her the time to do this. I did, by the way look at a map of Manitoba, and you would very early on been in Brandon, looking in the pound. As for the laws, they are quite clear, and yes do apply to your community.
All the best in all in this, the painful lessons, are the most meaningful.

[Gibbons]

I have an idea! Whenever someone posts something that is blatantly argumentative, or designed to make this thread go around in circles, or is obviously only attempting to be hurtful and rude- let's just play the "ignore" game. It can be like the post never showed up in the first place!

It just seems silly to keep posting back at the same people the logical arguments we've all used once before, when the poster obviously has no interest in what we're actually trying to say or confirm.

Did some body say something? I didn't hear anything... How about you?

Again- not directed to Kelly or LP or anyone like that! (So hard when I'm trying not to say the names of the people we're ignoring!)

[t.pettet]

Expressing an opinion is not being argumentative, its called Freedom of Speech and know not everyone is going to reach the same conclusions regarding this situation.

[Gibbons]

Agreed- which is why I qualified it with "blatantly."

Some people take freedom of speech too far- for example, everyone in my "Sexuality in Literature" univ. class



I honestly shouldn't post things when I'm at work. Makes me not-proof-read.