People for Pet OWNership

Click here to edit subtitle


view:  full / summary

The Arrested Truth: The Kennel License

Posted by P4PO on February 27, 2020 at 11:10 AM

For the last few weeks, we have been following the story of Margaret Boisture of Star Mountain Kennels and Bloomfield Connecticut ACO Christine "Sparky" Sparks. Both the search warrant and the arrest warrant issued contained several statements that were less than truthful. We are going to start a series to address the lies in the warrants with actual proof of the truth, not speculation.


It took almost 3 weeks to bring charges, and one of the charges was a revoked/suspended kennel license. We found that charge very interesting because Margaret has been licensed and compliant, with zero complaints from her former residence in Windsor for years.

There seems to be a lot of confusion as to what type of licensing she should have. In the “negotiations” between Margaret and the Town of Bloomfield, they would only return her dogs to her once she got her commercial kennel license. This was before they even charged her. She refused these terms because per CT law, she does not meet the requirements for a commercial kennel. Commercial kennels are Grooming facilities, pet shops, training centers. These facilities are UNABLE TO BREED.




CT Gen Stat § 22-342 (2012)

(a) Any owner or keeper of a kennel who breeds more than two litters of dogs annually shall apply to the town clerk in the town in which such kennel is located for a kennel license. Any owner or keeper of a kennel who breeds not more than two litters of dogs annually may apply to the town clerk of the town in which such kennel is located for a kennel license. For the purposes of this section, annually shall refer to the kennel license year which begins July first. Such town clerk shall issue to such applicant a kennel license on a form prescribed by the commissioner for a period from the date of such application until the thirtieth day of the ensuing June. The license shall specify the name and number of the kennel, the name of the owner and the name of the keeper and shall be in lieu of any other license required for any dog of either sex which may be kept in such kennel during the period for which the license is issued. Each license may be renewed from year to year by the town clerk upon application of such owner or keeper. Each such owner or keeper shall cause to be kept, upon each dog in such kennel, while it is at large, a collar or harness of leather or other suitable material, to which collar or harness shall be securely attached a tag or plate upon which shall appear the number of the kennel license, the name of the town issuing the license and the year of license. Such plates or tags shall be furnished by the town clerk of the town in which such kennel is licensed, at a cost of ten cents each, in such numbers, not fewer than the number of dogs kept in such kennel, and at such time as the licensee may request. The fee for each kennel license, when no more than ten dogs are kept in the kennel, shall be fifty dollars, and for a license for a kennel containing more than ten dogs, the fee shall be one hundred dollars, except that in the case of a kennel started after the first day of July, the license fee for the remainder of the year shall be a proportional part of the fee charged for one year. If the owner or keeper of any established kennel fails to obtain the kennel license on or before June thirtieth, he shall pay one dollar for each dog kept therein, in addition to the regular kennel fee.



Sec. 22-344. Licensing of commercial kennel, pet shop, training facility or grooming facility. …….

(2) Any person who maintains a commercial kennel and who advertises the services of such commercial kennel shall cause the license number for such commercial kennel, as issued pursuant to this section, to clearly appear in such advertisement. The commissioner may adopt regulations, in accordance with chapter 54, to prescribe the requirements for the appearance of the license number of a commercial kennel in any form of advertisement. Such regulation may include, but need not be limited to, the size, font and location of such license number for any given form of advertisement….

(f) The commissioner may, at any time, inspect or cause to be inspected by the commissioner's agents any such commercial kennel, pet shop, grooming facility or training facility, and if, (1) in the commissioner's judgment such kennel, pet shop, grooming facility or training facility is not being maintained in a sanitary and humane manner or in a manner that protects the public safety, (2) the commissioner finds that contagious, infectious or communicable disease or other unsatisfactory conditions exist, or (3) in the case of a pet shop, the commissioner finds any violation of the provisions of section 22a-381d, the commissioner may issue a fine to such commercial kennel, pet shop, grooming facility or training facility of not more than five hundred dollars for each animal that is the subject of such violation, may issue such orders as the commissioner deems necessary for the correction of such conditions and may quarantine the premises and animals. If the owner or keeper of such kennel, pet shop, grooming facility or training facility fails to comply with the regulations or orders of the commissioner, or fails to comply with any provision of the statutes or regulations relating to dogs or other animals, the commissioner may revoke or suspend such license. Any person aggrieved by any order issued under the provisions of this section may appeal therefrom in accordance with the provisions of section 4-183. Any person maintaining any commercial kennel, pet shop, grooming facility or training facility without having obtained a license for the same or after any such license has been revoked or suspended as provided herein shall be fined not more than two hundred dollars. The provisions of this section shall not apply to veterinary hospitals, except those boarding or grooming dogs for nonmedical purposes, and other establishments where all the dogs or animals were born and raised on the premises where they are kept for sale.

The arrest warrant says she needs to be a “Professional Breeding Kennel” per CT Dept of AG, CT doesn’t have this type of licensing. What they DO have is a statute for breeding facilities in CT.


Sec. 22-344c. Licensure of breeding facilities by towns. (a) If a town requires the licensure of persons keeping ten or more unneutered or unspayed dogs capable of breeding, such persons shall apply to the clerk of the town in which such dogs are located for a license. Such town clerk, if the zoning enforcement official has certified that the location where such dogs shall be kept conforms to the zoning regulations of the municipality, shall issue to such applicant a license, for a reasonable fee to be determined by the town, on a form prescribed by the town for a period, from the date of such application until the thirtieth day of the ensuing June which license shall specify the name and number of the dogs, the name of the owner and, if applicable, the name of a keeper. Each such license may be renewed from year to year by the town clerk upon application of such owner or keeper.

(b) The Commissioner of Agriculture, the Chief Animal Control Officer or any animal control officer may at any time inspect or cause to be inspected any location, required by a town to be licensed, keeping ten or more unneutered or unspayed dogs capable of breeding, by a registered veterinarian appointed by the commissioner and if, in the judgment of the commissioner, such location is not being maintained in a sanitary and humane manner or if he finds that communicable or infectious disease or other unsatisfactory conditions exist, he may issue such orders as he deems necessary for the correction of such conditions and may quarantine the premises and animals. If the owner or keeper of such location fails to comply with such orders, the commissioner may recommend the revocation or suspension of such license to the town which issued such license. - hmmm not part of this series, but look, per CT Law, Sparky was supposed to bring a COMMISSIONER REGISTERED Veterinarian with her on the inspection.

And because she had just moved her dogs to Bloomfield, CT, from Windsor, CT, just two weeks prior, she was covered by the transfer of residence law. Technically, because she still had her residence in Windsor, she didn’t need to turn in her old kennel license. But once her animals were seized in order to pacify the Town of Bloomfield, she went to the Town clerk and transferred to the Bloomfield address.


Sec. 22-352. Change of residence of owner. Any dog licensed as provided in this chapter may be kept in any town in this state under such license until the June thirtieth succeeding the date thereof, if the owner maintains a residence in the town where such license was issued. If any owner discontinues such residence and takes up residence in another town, he shall present the license and tag to the town clerk of such town and, for a fee of fifty cents, the town clerk shall issue a new license and tag for the town in which the owner now resides. Such town clerk shall retain the old license and tag in his possession.



These two licenses cover 10 dogs EACH. Notice the period of license.


So Margaret was compliant in her licensing. So how or why was she charged with Revoked or Suspended Kennel license? Sparky just needed to contact the Town of Windsor to confirm that Margaret was telling the truth about her license.







When they form your public opinion...

Posted by P4PO on February 27, 2020 at 10:15 AM


The latest dog seizure case I am following with fear and sadness in my heart, is the Connecticut case of Margaret Boisture, Star Mountain Podengos. Margaret is a show enthusiast and breeder of Podengos. She was relocating from her former property to a farm she owns in a different town that had previously had a renter occupying. The facility was undergoing some renovation, but even as is and in the middle of the moving and the work on it, it is a tidy place, with heat both from radiant floors and blown in/air as well. It is spacious, and these are small dogs.


Margaret kept her cool when she was raided. And she had been keeping her dogs in excellent condition, during all the turmoil of moving and renovating. Having been through both recently, I can tell you it is a monumental feat. When they arrived to raid her and seize her dogs, they prevented her from doing her usual dog related chores and care. They walked around taking photos and videos, inspecting, and Margaret quietly filmed them as they went, following behind them, until they forbid her from shadowing them and from filming. She caught the sneaky little odd things they did – like opening her trash cans, pulling out an empty bag that looked to be a treat bag, and photographing the trash. They photographed the inside of her floor mopping bucket. They photographed the cardboard boxes that were folded up and forming a divider between dog’s crates/pens – something done to lessen barking at one another and reaching thru to bite at another dog’s ears, etc. They then claimed the cardboard was to prevent dogs urinating on one another. (Sideways?) They photographed one dog, who looked nervous about these strangers’ intrusion, and labeled it “Terrified dog hovers in back of crate on non-sterilizable surface”. The dog had a clean blanket folded up in the crate to lay on.

(Thier photos)

(this cardboard was placed in front of a food bin by Sparky for a photo opp.)

(So scared that Sparky had to shove her fingers in each crate to pet them...rolls eyes)


Margaret’s place was remarkably clean, really. The temporary crates – there were platforms and pens being built and visible in the building – were clean, water dishes were clean and most had water in them. Yet the ACO claimed that the place was “Disgusting” “Deplorable.” “Loud.”

I am not sure why loud has a single thing to do with seizing someone’s animals. If you walk into a home with 2-3 dogs, and you are a stranger, it’s meal time, it’s time to go out, their expected routine is not unfolding…the dogs are going to bark, loudly. What does that have to do with neglect? Nothing.


The ACO stated that neighbors complained dogs were left out all night, yet she then stated there was a play area, fenced, with no dog footprints, so the dogs must have been confined too long inside and not let out at all.


When they removed all the dogs, crates, etc they photographed the leftover hair kitties, dirt, etc. left behind where the crates had been. It wasn’t much.

(wow dog hair and kibble under crates the horror!)

The dogs themselves were in good shape. Many were actively showing, were in condition and coat for that. The ACO reported that one dog had a heart murmur, one had a tumor. I do not understand why this has ANY bearing. If your dog develops a tumor of some kind, but it is still happy and living a quality life… no one comes and tells you that you MUST have the tumor removed or you must euthanize your dog. If your older dog develops a heart murmur and can live several more years, possibly with medication, possibly as is…why is that a notable detail? In this case, they didn’t use the old fall back “some dogs had ear infections” – which many pet dogs of various breeds chronically do develop, and are treated for, only to have them return. Except no one seizes your pet dog when he gets an ear infection.

So, here is why this case, (like Paul Upton’s case, a few years back, with the GSDs…he eventually won his case, it cost over 100K and over a year and his reputation.) really chills me. The dogs are not in danger, they are not in bad shape, they are not starved, abused, or neglected. They had a really nice facility and an owner who appears dedicated, just had a dog win a class at Westminster, and is in fact, known to breed excellent dogs – though that shouldn’t even matter. And yet, her dogs are gone, seized by an ACO who is a known AR extremist using her position to further her own anti-breeder agenda.


This MUST stop. It just must. It is wrong to vilify a group of people who are doing something they are passionate about – something that is not shady or illegal. News reports love to use the terminology “A suspected breeder” or “the owner was running a Breeding Operation” as if they are saying “Running a Meth lab.”


The public has been brainwashed. The dog loving public has very little knowledge about what is really happening or what they are seeing, and they all join in vigilante mob like unison, calling for the rotten animal abusing breeder to be hung or jailed or locked in a crate.


What the serious hell people?


As someone who lives with a lot of dogs, I am going to state something and ask you to believe it is true. Dogs eliminate, regularly. And they also do things we don’t necessarily like – they chew things, they play with things, they splatter mud as they come in the door, they tip over a water bucket, they de stuff a dog bed, they do things that cause them a wound, like stick their head under a chain link fence and scrape themselves. They shed. They get dirty playing outside and then, they come in and nap. When they get up, dry, sand slides off to the floor. If they go out in a group, some are too busy playing to want to poop, so they save that until they come back in, despite that you get them outside and give them ample time to do their business.


When you have 2 dogs, this kind of mess is slightly annoying, but you clean it up in a few minutes. If you let the dog or dogs back out again, it’s a quick re-do. When you have many dogs, whose needs you are trying to tend to, it takes a constant ground hog day like cycle of doing and redoing. No matter how hard you try, no matter how you work, it is never going to look pristine. You triage the most important chores first – you clean pens/crates/living areas, you pick up the outside bathroom area, you feed, you water. The dogs go out for their walks or play time. And if you have a choice of doing that or sweeping a floor, maybe the floor waits until later. And ten minutes after you do it, they mess it up again. There will be dog hair, there will be dirt. Some dogs like to empty their water bucket by dumping it and playing with the pail. This both makes a wet mess, and means that every time you walk by, they need a refill. Because if you get raided, and a bucket is empty, they will photograph that and say you neglect to water your dogs. Maybe you use shavings for bedding, and the dogs kick that out of their pens, leaving the aisles/floor covered constantly.


When you are cleaning multiple pens and a dog yard where they often poop, you need to pick up the waste and then dispose of it. You think you’re on top of things because you are picking up the poop and placing it in a bag for disposal. But if you haul that refuse to the dump once a week or once a month, and you have the filled bags set aside somewhere until such day…they take photos of the trash and fault you for it being there.


This, my friends, is witch hunting. This is looking to find fault and make reasons to take a person’s animals – a person’s property, by law, - and hold them for ransom to make money, headlines and to hopefully, ruin the person’s reputation and put them out of business.

It is wrong to create a different standard for one person than for another. Whether you own one pet dog or ten, you cannot seize one person’s dogs because the dog has dirty teeth that require a $400.00 dental, when there is no law stating as an animal owner, you by law have to get your dogs’ teeth cleaned. You can’t require one set of standards for one person and accept less from another. If you, as a pet owner, keep a dog who is abysmally skinny from IBD/constant diarrhea that can’t be managed, you might be a saint in many people’s eyes. If a Breeder keeps such a dog – a dog who is of no “use” to a breeding program – and cares for the dog who isn’t a great candidate to be homed because most pet owners don’t want to deal with constant diarrhea – your dog gets seized and you get charged with cruelty. This has got to stop.


Just like there are always some “bad” breeders, some “bad” pet owners, there are also some bad rescues. And in fact, the new “pet stores” – offering dogs to the public with questionable breeding and history from questionable sources – ARE rescues. In recent years it has become a huge money making endeavor for these organizations to buy dogs from less than reputable breeders, from auctions, from other countries and ship them across the country here, importing disease and in conditions that a someone not protected by Rescue status would likely be charged with neglect for, and then “adopt” them to the public with sad stories. Where our shelters were literally almost EMPTY in the Northeast for some years, now these places are filled with dogs brought up from the south or from other countries. These Rescues advertise getting shipments of puppies, which are “adopted” with higher fees. Purebred dogs are supposedly rescued from “Meat Trade”, and homes in this country. Do you really believe that some overseas meat operation is breeding purebred dogs???


With it becoming increasingly difficult for Hobby Breeders, people invested in their breed, to breed dogs, and with the push from the “Adopt Don’t Shop” campaign for you to ONLY get your dog from a Rescue/Shelter… your choices in obtaining a well bred, thoughtfully bred, animal with known parentage, temperaments, health, and raising practices, are being eroded. There is no accountability from these places if they adopt you out a dog that later bites a child’s face off. You are being asked to leave your children in the presence of a dog whose background and character history is largely unknown. And with all the laws on banning breeding, and mandatory spay /neuter, how long do you think it will be before there is no such thing as having a purebred dog?


The public has been brainwashed. What you need to know is that the reason dogs are in shelters is NOT because a Breeder’s dog had two litters last year and those puppies were sold to families. The reason dogs get dumped is PEOPLE. Buyers, Adopters, people…they dump the dogs. If the dog gets too big, develops habits they don’t like, is too expensive, has health issues, they’re moving and their new apartment won’t allow dogs…THESE PEOPLE are putting dogs in shelters or abandoning them as strays. NOT breeders like me. Many of us have contracts requiring our puppy buyers to offer us back a dog we bred, if at any point, they can’t keep the dog. This has led to me having many extra dogs, over the course of many years. Those dogs will never be bred. I pay for them and spend time and resources caring for them. And then I get called a hoarder because someone thinks I have more dogs than I need.


The fur baby loving public believes a dog can only be happy in a home with 1-2 dogs and buried in toys and treats. This is not true. For some dogs, that is a perfect home, for others, it is not. If someone has a group of 10 dogs, who have always had one another as a social pack, and have interacted together, played together, shared resources, and you send that dog to a traditional home where the people go to work and leave the dog alone all day, that dog might not thrive. That dog might rather have less individual human attention and less toys, and spend his day with canine companions and a rich dog-dog social life and with a human who communicates well with him and he has confidence in. Dogs have needs that must be met, and if their needs are met, they can live a very happy life in a non-traditional home environment. There are dogs who are happy, thriving, content in a kennel routine, and there are dogs who are miserable in a family home with a cushy dog bed, toys, and endless cookies.


What does that have to do with seizures? When you brainwash people into thinking the dogs are miserable simply for the fact of being in a kennel with a lot of dogs, you play on people’s false assumptions and heartstrings. So many of these people who comment online “I’d give that poor baby a great home” and trot on down to apply to adopt, wind up exasperated and ready to give the dog back up to the shelter because the dog has behaviors they don’t like, or is unhappy, or chews their stuff. Some of these families then have to crate the dog all day while they work, because the dog can’t be safely left in the home while they work all day and then at night, the dog is so eager for interaction, the family can’t make dinner and relax. But, hey, the dog is better off than he was in that Breeder’s kennel, right? Because now he has a soft bed and is only one dog with lots of attention.


Seized dogs that make headlines generate donations from the Fur baby loving public. They generate adoptions, even for other dogs in the shelter or rescue because they need to “make room”, or they already adopted those dogs out, but convince you to consider another dog that they have there. Many of these seized dogs that are supposedly in terrible shape, wind up adoptable within a week of being seized, if the owner surrenders them.


Margaret’s case is particularly disturbing because there are no horrific conditions. There was no neglect. All she is being targeted for is having a lot of dogs, having neighbors who don’t want her keeping dogs on her property, and of being in transition. What better time to raid someone than during a move, right? Because conditions would likely be at their worst right then. Except, in this case, the “worst” is pretty good!


While breeders find fault with one another’s protocols or set ups or even with their breeding stock and philosophy, and the number of dogs they keep or own or co own, the HSUS and others have cohesively united, launched and executed a propaganda campaign that has infiltrated the entire country and the pet loving public on the whole, and turned them against us, made us into “Greeders”, villains, lowlifes. The time to stand together and combat their efforts, the time to educate the public to the REAL truth is NOW, before there are none of us left because it becomes illegal to breed and sell puppies at all. Many of us supported Paul Upton for this reason. And now we should support Margaret, too. Down the road, you or I may be next. And most of us cannot afford to combat the deep pockets of an agency that seizes our dogs.


When it is YOU facing the loss of your world, you are going to want others to stand with you and help. And so, we must help Margaret. Together, we are much stronger and together we can fight and win. Alone, we will all be defeated, in the near future, we may be legislated and public opinioned out of existence.


Who really needs facts anyway?

Posted by P4PO on January 30, 2020 at 9:05 PM

Those of us at P4PO keep a “watchlist” of people in authority of whom we should be keeping track, just in case they decide to be the letter of the law rather than follow it. Well, one of those authorities recently decided she didn’t need no stinkin’ badges. And she is one of those figures who needs a nice ego stroke when laying down the law against “evil breeders.”

This lawless law figure is town ACO in Bloomfield Connecticut, Christine “Chris” Sparks." target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://


“Sparks, got into the animal control business after starting out in animal rescue. Her first save was a malnourished and neglected cat that lived in the same Southern California apartment complex as Sparks.

Sparks started her career as a volunteer at the ASPCA, working her way up from kennel cleaning to cruelty investigations. She took courses at a community college and eventually became an animal control officer, working in Portland and Cromwell for four years before joining Bloomfield.

"I needed to affect punishment on the abusers," Sparks said.


She is important you know! She wrote two books! We won’t link so we don’t give her more traffic but here are the book covers.




So why is she suddenly in our direct line of sights? Well, it seems we had a message in our inbox telling us that she has executed a raid and seized animals of a prominent breeder. ILLEGALLY!!! (No! We know it doesn’t happen!)

It looks like the call was for a noise complaint of outdoor dogs. She went to investigate the noise complaint and asked to go into the buildings at the breeder’s home. The breeder declined the inspection, demanding that the authorities get a search warrant. The breeder is not a commercial kennel and is not subject to random kennel inspections. Well, Sparky was all buzzed out about this recalcitrance from the breeder and promised she would file a warrant.


According to the warrant the complaint was PHONED IN by a Lindsey Bellanger. Public access records do not show any neighbors directly or in the corresponding neighborhood with anything resembling that name. Hmmm…. (More on Lindsey later ��;)



Sparky is a "renowned" ANIMAL RIGHTS AUTHOR… hmmm interesting indeed.


And just at the beginning of January, one of the biggest animal rights cells [based out of Bloomfield] had an advocacy for animals conference. This same conference that Sparky has been a guest speaker at in the past. She is an obvious animal rights supporter." target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://

And this group publicly supports that they are in the pockets of some of Connecticut’s legislators to push for “puppy mill bans, ” which will be voted on in the next two weeks." target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://


So yeah maybe just a hot-headed ACO. Or Not.





Animal Activist - Killing Zoos

Posted by P4PO on August 20, 2019 at 10:00 AM

A new Guest Blogger (NGB for short). NGB was nice enough to agree to help while or regular blogger is on a much-needed sabbatical.

In a stunning move, Virginia's top animal rights extremist, Michelle Welch, who moves and shakes with convicted felons, personally led an illegal raid on a beloved second-generation exotic animal zoo in Winchester, Virginia. Welch is a good example of too much power being bestowed on one person. She acts as a 'special prosecutor', overriding locals who know their community, to go after and shut down businesses throughout the state that she is ideologically opposed to. Her most recent target is a 40 year old family owned small exotic animal zoo. Wilson's Wild Animal Park, now in its second-generation of family ownership is a well-loved local institution. Every year, owner Keith Wilson hosts a charity drive called "Boo in the Zoo" to raise money for children with autism and rents his animals out for many local live nativity shows through the holiday season. Keith is so well respected in the exotic animal business that his camels have been exhibited on "Fox and Friends" in New York and showcased on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC and stood on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court as part of Faith in Action's annual Christmas demonstration. Just two weeks ago, Keith Wilson, showcased his animals at the local Frederick County Fair. Now Wilson's zoo sits empty. No children are happily feeding the goats or the unique wooly Hungarian Mangalica pigs. No awed adults are gazing at the tigers or looking curiously at the two majestic lions who doze in the sun. No families are happily browsing in the pumpkin patch. Just two weeks after the county fair, Michelle Welch led an out of state coalition of animal rights activists to seize and steal all of Wilson's animals. The animals are all gone. A courthouse worker with loose lips states they were shipped to Colorado in violation of USDA interstate shipping regulations. Probably to one of the many 'sanctuaries' that house animals in captivity that have been saved from being held in captivity. Yes, you read that right. If an animal rights activist holds an animal in captivity in a non-profit 'sanctuary' where they personally pocket all the tax-free donations it is perfectly acceptable. However, in America today if you are a small business owner who owns animals and people pay you to see them and you pay taxes on your business, that's not acceptable. Welch likes to brag in her bios that she's the President of the Virginia Animal Fighting Taskforce. It's a high-sounding name for an animal rights front group founded by five time convicted felon John "JP" Goodwin. Goodwin, a former Animal Liberation Front (ALF) terrorist, was outed in court years ago as a con artist.

He sells himself as an animal fighting expert but court testimony in Wisconsin revealed that he's never seen a dog fight in his life. Welch is no better. She's made her career out of destroying animal owners but she herself has no education in animal care. In 2015, with just nine years of experience, she was named to head the nation’s first Attorney General's Animal Law Unit giving her unlimited power to destroy anyone in the state. Meanwhile, Wilson's Wild Animal Park has spent years fighting off the animal killers of PETA who have attacked Keith several times.

PETA is notorious for being caught running mobile death vans in 2005. They famously stood trial for the "Piggly Wiggly Dumpster" incidents after dozens of dead dogs and cats were found to have been killed by PETA operatives. More recently PETA settled a lawsuit in 2017 when they were caught stealing and killing a little girls Chihuahua. The extremists behind PETA make no secret of the fact that they are completely opposed to human ownership of animals all the way down to the dog at your feet or the cat on your window sill. The fight has now been moved to the courtroom where Keith Wilson has to defend himself against a government determined to outlaw America's zoos, farms and pet owners.

Sweet Lies!

Posted by P4PO on May 10, 2019 at 7:50 PM

No matter how normal people like to make themselves seem to the public sooner or later their true selves tend to come out. I recently introduced you to Cynthia Sweet owner of Sweet Paws rescue in Massachusetts. Looking through her media appearances and Facebook page was a trip down the proverbial rabbit hole. The very first thing that jumped out at me though was the above post. She is admitting that the reason she wanted these dogs away from the breeder is because she loathes breeders. Well, now that we have that out of the way let’s take a closer look at Ms. Cynthia.

The most important thing to know about Cynthia is that she doesn’t seem to have much fondness for the truth. She emphatically states that none of the dogs that were turned over to her rescue had ever been to the vet. That lie managed to get people up in arms fast and the donations, of course started pouring in.


Apparently it never occurred to the unthinking masses that there are ways to find out if that was true or not. It took about 5 minutes before people started messaging P4 with links to the dogs health clearances. It has been quite a mystery how this magical breeder could get OFAs on her dogs without going to a vet.

Newsflash: You can’t.

If you follow the P4PO Facebook page you will have seen several postings about this already, so there’s no need to add more here.

So, now that we know Cynthia may not always tell the truth everything she has said suddenly becomes suspicious.

Let’s look at the entire post that I shared screenshots from above. It’s full of deceptive statements with one goal in mind, raising more and more money.

Because I know how to use the Google machine and apparently Cyndy Lou Liar can’t I decided to look at the pedigrees of the breeders dogs. Anyone can do this, so I am not going to take up time and space here posting more than one. Here is the pedigree for Mia,one of the bitches seized.

The pretty purple colors mean I clicked on each of those links and checked health testing. Guess what? They are all health tested, so Cyndy Lou Liar is being true to form and making up a false narrative probably in hope of raising more money for her “rescue”. Clearly the breeder was doing the exact opposite of what Cynthia claims because her pedigrees show generation after generation of health-tested dogs. Mia not only has OFA Good hips and Normal elbows, her Golden Retriever form Ichthyosis status is clear. What this means is Mia has been cleared through DNA. Ichthyosis is a skin disorder that may appear in some lines of the breed. A breeder who tests for it obviously cares about the health of her dogs.

Apparently Cynthia doesn’t know enough about dogs to know that papilloma just means warts. This screenshot is from another heartbreaking case we blogged about and is shared with permission.

Of course, Cyndy Lou Liar Knows she will make even more money from the dogs if she lies about the severity of the virus.

Cynthia sure does love her buzzwords though, especially when referring to the dogs as “aggressive, skittish, unsocialized and the big one medically compromised”. Brace yourself for the following pictures taken the day CLL got the dogs.

Anyone working with aggressive dogs knows that the way to handle them is not to pack them into a van and then bring them to an unknown destination and have strangers take them out of crates. That is a recipe for disaster, and you can see Cyndy did the right thing knowing these dogs were aggressive and made sure only experienced people were handling these dogs with catchpoles and appropriate clothing.

Just kidding. You can see in the following pictures how concerned she truly was about these dogs being aggressive.

This volunteer is obviously terrified and the dog is totally skittish.

These two are totally freaking out, between the strangers and the camera they can’t decide if they should maul the cameraman of flee in a panic.



I think the one on the right is going for the jugular and the one on the left is frantically trying to hide from the volunteer.

I commend all the volunteers especially this jolly fellow for putting their lives and limbs in danger handling the skittish aggressive dogs.

I think the one on the right is going for the jugular and the one on the left is frantically trying to hide from the volunteer.

I commend all the volunteers especially this jolly fellow for putting their lives and limbs in danger handling the skittish aggressive dogs.

CLL loves her little rants and is easily triggered especially about money and we are definitely not the first ones to question the fact that the rescue that she owns, runs and is the employed by has close to $250,000 in assets.

Well this is been fun, and I can’t wait for you all to see what’s coming up next!

(Shout out to RM for helping me with this, who would have ever thought this day would come xoxo)


Question Everything

Posted by P4PO on May 8, 2019 at 9:15 PM

This is a quick little blog just ask a question.

There was a raid recently in Massachusetts of Linder Pernice, who is a golden retriever breeder. Our earlier blog covered a little bit of the rescue that now has her dogs. One of the biggest claims the rescue has been making is that the sweetest dogs never saw a vet. Further proof that people who run rescues have most of the general public and the media completely fooled. Since I have seen nothing yet that leads me to believe this breeder has broken any laws I haven’t done much digging on her yet as the people behind the scenes are the ones that matter in these instances. In talking about this raid with a friend she mentioned to me that she had been looking at some of the breeders dogs and was wondering how dogs with OFA numbers managed to get those numbers without ever seeing a vet. So for everyone who is believing what the media is saying that these dogs have never been vetted here is my question;


Because I need to know, I’ve been wasting a lot of money over the years going to a vet for OFA numbers if there’s a magical way to get them without seeing a vet.

Please, if anyone knows the answer to that question message the page and give us that magical information. I mean here’s Brenda Hamelin the animal control officer who took the dogs and has been helping write the narrative. Does this look like a face that would lie?

The Mass Goldens

Posted by P4PO on May 8, 2019 at 10:55 AM

So, unless you live under a rock you have seen the recent raid in Massachusetts that happened to a Golden retriever breeder.

The quick version is that after 17 years the ACO In Millis Massachusetts finally fulfilled her vendetta against Linda Pernice and managed to get her dogs removed.

As this case is unfolding pretty much as I type there is not a lot of information out yet. Thankfully we have been contacted by someone who claims to have first hand knowledge of what a farce this seizure truly appears to be. (Yeah, we have verified the anonymous informants information and claims so don’t bore us by going there.)

Once more details officially come out we will share more in depth about this breeder and her journey. For now just know her biggest crime seems to be that she is a breeder and what makes this situation worse is people in the show community are (as usual) refusing to support this breeder because she has committed the worst sin in dogdom… Wait for it…..


Thankfully most of the people reading this blog are capable of critical thinking and understand that people, yes, even the great unwashed general public deserve to be able to purchase purebred dogs and that we NEED pet breeders.

All that is for another day though. Today I want to introduce you all to the “rescue” that now has the dogs.

Sweet Paws Rescue is, according to them “A registered non profit animal rescue based in Massachusetts.we are a grassroots, boots-on-the-ground, Shelter list, foster based and volunteer powered organization. We can really work with in two of the poorest counties in Mississippi and Alabama and since 2011 we have rescued over 7000 puppies, dogs and cats that would not have a chance at life otherwise. We are also a local resource for the abandoned and displaced, and animals seized in cruelty cases.” (There is more but I’m not skilled enough to copy and paste it and got tired of typing.)

So noble, it almost sounds like it is being run by a White Knight from the days of yore.

Well, I know it has been a long time since I have blogged, but when I started researching what this rescue is really about I got so upset I knew I had to share. I can assure you that they are the furthest thing from the image they attempt to foster as is possible.

As you can see here from their financials they have a net assets of $247,977. That is after their revenue of $537,493 and their expenses of $428,482. They don’t do too bad, and I will include the link at the end of this blog for everyone to follow if they want to see all of the information.

Interesting, that with that money coming in and with $240,977 in the bank by their own admission where the dogs are kept is in constant need of repair and the people in charge of repairing it have to beg for help with free tools to make repairs. Why can’t this rescue be bothered to spend a few hundred dollars and purchase proper tools?

With $240,000+ in assets they seriously can’t buy a few tools? Where is the money going? Why isn’t it important that they maintain their facility appropriately? I would think that would be one of the main concerns and that they would not be miserly in that situation.

That’s just a matter of me being curious to be honest. I really would love to know the answer though, maybe the people in charge will message the page and let me know. I do know that the owner of the rescue Cynthia Sweet has her rent, cell phone and gas paid for by the rescue, other than that though she claims to pay her own bills. But more on that next blog.

My real interest came when I read the information in the following two screenshots

First, this one…

It seems to me this rescue knew they would be getting a windfall of purebred dogs in the near future and didn’t want to bother with their usual product of southern dogs. (I will go into those details in a future blog.) As we all know, as much money as there is to be made with miscellaneous rescues, purebreds are where the money is at.

I also question the statement that they are not a shelter. They are apparently an official not-for-profit and have a building that is in constant disrepair yet they are not a shelter? So curious. If they are not shelter and they are foster based what building needs to be repaired? (No worries, I know the answer to that and you all will too next blog.)

This next screenshot is a simple comment for people to come and volunteer. But I found it interesting that they seem to always have puppies. Of course that’s where the moneys at because people do want puppies and breeders don’t produce enough for a pet markets so this awfu this next screenshot is a simple comment for people to come and volunteer. But I found it interesting that they seem to always have puppies. Of course that’s where the money’s at because people do want puppies and breeders don’t produce enough for pet markets so there’s Often a need for people to go to these retail rescue locations. Cynthia definitely knows where the money is at.

You know what they say...Follow the money!

Behind 13

Posted by P4PO on October 14, 2018 at 10:45 PM

Who is behind the campaigns for Amendment 13?

All roads lead back to H$U$

Although there was never really much of a question, it should be clear who’s behind this. H$U$ is the master of deception, so how are they using this money to deceive the public?


Speaking of that road to H$U$...

Bigger $ = Bigger signs




The Positive Economic Impact of Racing Greyhounds

Posted by P4PO on September 4, 2018 at 1:05 PM



Since 2007, the racing greyhound community has contributed almost 10 million dollars to the Florida school systems. If Amendment 13 passes, that is just one of the major losses for the state.

Let’s look at the impact in Palm Beach alone. Remember to multiply that amount by every track in the state—the effects would be terribly devastating.

Here are the PBKC’s economic impact and community contributions (2017)

- 539 employees with payroll of $16.8 million

- 12 kennels with 48 employees, earning $4.2 million in purses

- $4.8 million State of Florida & PB County taxes paid

- $10.4 million spent locally on goods and services

- $484,623 donated to local charities

- $86,316 contributed to Greyhound adoption programs

Now that we know the financial loss in JUST Palm Beach alone, let’s think about the rest of the state.

Let’s consider the 3,000 humans that will be out of work. Many of these people have worked in this industry their entire adult lives. They may be second, or even third generation “dog people”

Grey2K and H$U$ employees do not need to worry about their next paycheck—the millions of dollars in donations, generated by misleading propaganda will keep them going forever.

NYC and Why We Can Never Stop

Posted by P4PO on September 2, 2018 at 8:25 PM

New guest blogger here with a very old fight that seems to refuse to die, and trust me, as a former NYC resident, it NEEDS to die. 

When we were in  the midst of the first battle with the Mayor and the nefarious NYClass, I saw with my own eyes the amazing iconic industry that makes Central Park one of the most visited areas in the state.

Every day on my walk from my apartment in Hell's kitchen, I would pass the hackline and stop and chat with the fabulous drivers as the horses waited to go to work. I ws able to witness the hellacious behaviors the anti-carriage horse zealots displayed and got involved with the fight to save the industry. We won. Or did we?

This past week we learned that DeBlasio has once again bowed to the pressures of a misinformed group of protein starved individuals and now wants to move the carriages to inside the park only.

While this is not an actual "ban" this is the beginning of slowly phasing out a much beloved part of the city. 

Our friend and champion of the industry Christina Hansen weighs in with what will happen if this goes through: 

"NYCLASS is making it seem like this is good for the horses. It’s not.

It would destroy the business at night, and/or would more or less force drivers to work the streets after 9 PM, as they are allowed to do, but most night drivers prefer to wait on 59th St where everyone knows where they are, and then do a quiet ride in the park. Put the carriages in the dark in the park with no foot traffic, and drivers will obviously go out on the streets then to look for rides after 9 PM (or all day on Sunday).

The proposed locations in the park include 2 spots on steep hills, which means the horses have to work just to keep the carriage from rolling backwards. Drivers would then need to use chocks or the brake constantly, but when the carriage moving up spots continuously, stop and start, one spot at a time, it’s more work.

Another proposed stand at Tavern On the Green is in full sun all day, while all of our current stands on 59th St are in partial shade most of the day year round.

4 of the 5 proposed locations are in spots that do not have an adjacent sidewalk. That means that potential customers must walk in the street, with bicycles and pedicabs and emergency vehicles, and are not protected by a safe curb when approaching the horses, which we all know little kids like to do. This is punishing the carriages, making the horses and their drivers inaccessible to their friends, admirers and potential customers.

(I am always more comfortable with people approaching my horse on the sidewalk than on the street, where there is no obvious safety boundary to a lay person to prevent getting stepped on or inadvertently kicked during fly swatting). The proposal is clearly designed to remove the horses and drivers from easy, safe access/approachability."