Also, why would they not allow his personal veterinarian to check his dogs?
It's scary. Because Animal Control can seize your dogs without due process, everyone is nervous.
I mean, yes, he has a number of dogs. Not 600 or 800 dogs, certainly not a puppy mill. But more than your typical pet owner. Llombardo, you have more than the typical pet owner, and yours are pets. I certainly do.
But that doesn't mean we aren't treating them as individuals. I think sometimes, because we have many, we can appreciate them for the individuals they are maybe a little better than your average pet owner, who is expecting XYZ in terms of obedience, training, social behavior, etc. That is just to make a point. We can have a dozen or more dogs, and still know that Milla is the one with the wonky ears, and the light eyes, and the cowlick, who is affectionate, a little less confident, ok with obedience, but more of a jumping bean that would be better at agility, who had a bump on her eyelid that was successfully treated at the vet, was skinny, barely 50 pounds up to 4 years old, and nearing 8, she is up to 68. She is soft, biddable, good with other dogs and people, but will scream bloody murder if she thinks she has been crated long enough and may be missing out on something. We know who she is out of, and where she gets her temperament from. We know what she likes and what she dislikes.
We know as much and more about each one of our dogs.
It's like kids. People with one or two kids cannot imagine having 19 kids. That's crazy, how can they get enough attention. But when we were young, people with 1-2 kids couldn't imagine how someone could give enough attention to six kids. Those of us from larger families can't imagine having no or only one sibling. But parents with a bunch of kids love each of them, individually. And maybe they do not run them to every extra-curricular activity available, but their kids have a good life.
Back to dogs. The government should step in if the dogs are physically suffering, and the owner cannot provide any evidence that the dog's issues have been addressed appropriately. The government should step in if the owner is breaking the law in how the animals are being kept -- not providing shelter, not providing water, if there are laws against chaining, evidence that they are not following the laws. In the US, they are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, and that should be by a jury of their peers, not AC.
It doesn't sound like Upton's dogs fell into any of these categories.
On either PETA's or HSUS web page it tells how to go after breeders. Upton is a breeder. It says that when you go, bring reporters and camera people, etc. Pick up the worst animal and make sure they photograph it. Ok. We haven't really seen any horror-story type pictures yet. It then says, if you cannot find anything wrong with the conditions of how the dogs are kept, check the structure. So, these yayhoos are going to take photos of the ceilings and structure that has nothing to do with where or how the dogs are kept. How does this serve justice? Not everyone is rich, and some of us put our money into our dogs and not into the structure. Less important things are fixed but not necessarily repaired to a like new state, like water damage from a leaky roof -- roof is fixed, water is stopped, but the stained ceiling remains, because that is non-value added. The money that could have went into that, went to another dog show, x-rays on a bitch, a dental cleaning on an older retired bitch. Barring that, they tell you to go after their tax forms -- so if you cannot find horrendous conditions on animals, and you cannot find anything less than perfectly kept up, then go after their taxes -- isn't this fishing for any way to trip someone up?
The government is going beyond their bounds here. Don't think that because you don't breed it cannot effect you. Because once they are done stealing breeder's dogs, what is this highly effective dictator-like panel of power hungry creeps going to go after next? Already you can't dock or crop in some places. And yes, I picked this breed, in part because I don't like the idea of those things. But what if? What if they made a law saying that dogs must be transported in vehicles in airline crates. What about those of us who can't fit an airline crate in our vehicle? If we cannot run out and get a larger vehicle, can they stop our car and grab our pooch?
How about if tomorrow, they feel that prong collars or e-collars are inhumane, and go after the congress to pass laws forbidding them. Now, these people, remember do not need evidence or a court trial -- you have to prove to them that you are not using such a device and never have. A simple anonymous phone call can get a court order to search your home and check your dogs. If they see you have a tunnel and an A-frame in your back yard, they may determine that your dogs are being trained and most likely they are being trained with such a collar, so even though they haven't found one, they are going to seize your dog and force you to pay an exorbitant monthly fee for its keep while we wait for six months or 3 years for you to either clear yourself with the courts or fail to clear yourself. And all the time you know that your dog who is frantic in tight spaces is going berserk in that kennel, exposed to every disease under the sun.
This is a horrible thing.
2 litters were born there in the pound. 1 of them, all pups died. It is beyond disgusting. Taking a pregnant bitch away from a good home is reprehensible.