Meanwhile in Crazy Town a.k.a. And the point of this is what exactly?

11 Aug

Any of you reasonably up to date on dog show drama may be reasonably well-aware of what we’ll refer to as “Piper-Gate 2014″. For those of you unfamiliar, the very abbreviated version is a Sheltie named Piper escaped from her caretaker when her owner was off at her breed’s national back in April. Through several somewhat iffy transactions over a holiday weekend, the microchipped but unregistered Piper ended up in a breed-rescue. Within a short period of time, the owners of Piper had returned, contacted the rescue, and began what should have been a simple, albeit documentation-intense, return process. Last week after much batshittery, the matter hit a courtroom where the judge ordered the return of Miss Piper to her owners. Seems simple, despite being overly dramatic and filled with stuff Dr. Phil needs to produce a show on including internet bullying, larceny accusations and what we can only assume are “I know you are but what am I” rubber/glue threats.

Right on, you creepy bald bastard!


However, instead of returning Piper, the rescue posted a $10,000 bond (Here) .  Wait, what?  $10,000?  Do you know how far that would go in most rescues and how many other animals that money could save?  Why would any good rescue give that kind of money to keep ONE dog that has loving and responsible owners who desperately want her back and after all this drama really didn’t need to be rescue in the first place?  Oh, that’s right.  Ego and making a statement against breeders.  We get it.  Many rescuers are vehemently against breeders, but Piper is not a shitty BYB Sheltie who ended up in a home with some yokels.  She’s a much-loved champion dog from a good breeder who happened to get lost.


Too Late. She said Spite.


Really our question is, to what end is the rescue fighting this? If the real mission of the rescue is save and rehome unwanted Shelties, they certainly are barking up the wrong tree.  Why not spend their energy and money pulling other dogs from shelters who truly don’t have anywhere to go?  We’re pretty sure that this has become more about people than about the animals and we really don’t like the people.


…except on command.



Unfortunately for good rescues this has, in much of the ethical breeding community, created a major backlash. Why would breeders support a rescue who wouldn’t do their best to reunite a dog with their owners or breeders? Ethical breeders take their responsibilities to their dogs incredibly seriously and being painted with the same brush as BYB garbage millers does not induce a particular love of donating to said organizations.


“Rescue keeps calling me at night and breathing heavily.”

This is just another case of when everyone would be better off if rescues and breeders could work together.  So many more dogs would be saved in the long run, but unfortunately both sides have to be willing to work together, and Central Ohio Sheltie Rescue has certainly burned  firebombed some bridges.


I put a Hollister on your face. That’s how much I hate you.


So dear minions, until cooler heads prevail (Or Ohio just gets wiped out in a Noah’s Ark styled flood) Piper will remain in limbo. What can you do to prevent such an incident happening to you?


-Microchip, register, and keep your microchip information up to date. IIt can serve as proof of ownership in many states. Make sure you have a secondary contact (Breeder or a trainer-friend is usually a good choice) in case you are for some reason unreachable.

-Keep current full body and profile pictures of your dogs to use for ‘Lost Dog’ posters and for quick identification in places where microchip scanners aren’t readily available.

-Make and keep good rescue/shelter contacts. Volunteer, transport or offer clerical assistance to rescues in your area. You will never know when that networking will be helpful. The more eyes looking for your pup the better.

-Have a “Lost Dog” plan in place for any pet-sitters or friends who will be watching your dog. A simple checklist of who to call and where to check first as well as friends and contacts who can help put legs on the ground (or on the Facebook groups) to help find your pet.



Be the cooler heads, kids, and with luck Piper will be home, safe and sound shortly.


Bill Nye’s got this. Bring it down a notch, peeps.

426 Responses to “Meanwhile in Crazy Town a.k.a. And the point of this is what exactly?”

  1. Nora August 14, 2014 at 5:41 pm #

    I’m gonna say Bye Felicia to this discussion because A) it’s raising my blood pressure and B) it’s making me paranoid, and I am not the paranoid type, but just want to say two things: 1) I only posted things I KNEW about and directly observed (which is why I didn’t have to do any research! See how that works?) and 2) Linda Medero,if you read this, I sent you a PM that probably ended up in your Other folder.

  2. Walt - yes that Walt August 14, 2014 at 7:31 pm #

    So when I try to talk to people on the other side I have conversations like this,

    Karen Cook Vick
    4/27, 7:05pm
    Karen Cook Vick
    Since you seem to know so much, let me let you in a little secret your so called friend is telling you. The dog, the show dog was given away in December to a family in Columbus. GIVEN AWAY. This woman who is saying she owns the dog, gave it away. That is the owner who lost a dog. I don’t need you telling me anything about what is going on because I have ALL the details. Thank you, but don’t message me again

    Walt Christensen
    4/27, 7:06pm
    Walt Christensen
    and she remained on as co-owner

    Karen Cook Vick
    4/27, 7:06pm
    Karen Cook Vick
    nope, shes lying

    but goodbye

    Walt Christensen
    4/27, 7:07pm
    Walt Christensen
    I know that as well and it does not make any difference she is still the co-owner which legally makes her the owner

    Karen Cook Vick
    4/27, 7:08pm
    Karen Cook Vick
    the rescue has the right to the dog they adopted. LEGALLY. It’s not even the same dog, you people are nuts. The microchip numbers do not even match!!!!! Get the facts!!!!

    Walt Christensen
    4/27, 7:08pm
    Walt Christensen
    then penny is now lying to you FCAS has confirmed the chip number with Veronica
    legally does not mean morally

    Karen Cook Vick
    4/27, 7:09pm
    Karen Cook Vick
    well if this so called owner was moral, she wouldn’t be lying

    Walt Christensen
    4/27, 7:09pm
    Walt Christensen

    what lies???

    Karen Cook Vick
    4/27, 7:09pm
    Karen Cook Vick

    please go away
    ive already reported you, so stop messaging me

    Walt Christensen
    4/27, 7:10pm
    Walt Christensen
    have Penny give the dog back that is all we ask

    Karen Cook Vick
    4/27, 7:10pm
    Karen Cook Vick

    fuck you
    go away

    So this is how trying to converse with the other side has gotten me.

    • muse0551 August 14, 2014 at 7:56 pm #

      Wow…amazing. And poor Piper languishes, wondering where her family is and why they won’t come and get her.

    • patti shanaberg August 14, 2014 at 8:17 pm #

      trying to converse? sounds like harassment to me! whatever her crime there is no question these people (not the breeder) have been attacked by a pack of rabid pit bulls who are relying on a very limited amount of actual factual information and a lot of gossip. I’m glad she will at least have her day in court and hope we will have access to the documented facts and claims made under oath from both sides.

      • Walt - yes that Walt August 15, 2014 at 4:03 am #

        me harass her? she IM’d me

      • patti shanaberg August 15, 2014 at 6:14 pm #

        It’s only natural that she would want to defend herself – in the messages you posted – yes, in my opinion, you were harrassing her. She asked for you to go away and stop several times.

      • edrie blackwelder August 15, 2014 at 6:35 pm #

        karen cook vick is listed as a board member of cosr – and as a board member of a 501c3, asking relevant questions of her for the corporation where she sits on the board is not harrassment.

      • OhioRules! August 16, 2014 at 12:50 am #

        Walt do you have a screen shot of this conversation instead of a copy and paste? It looks like her first comment is actually a response to something you might have messaged her about.

    • Lorain Shelties August 17, 2014 at 3:18 pm #

      Karen Cook Vick Please share what evidence you have that the microchip numbers dont match.

  3. Linda Medero August 14, 2014 at 8:15 pm #

    A decision was reached in Birmingham Humane Society v. Dickson where the court found that an owner’s property rights continue after the holding period expires if the pet has not yet been disposed. 661 So.2d 759 (Ala.App. 1994). The plaintiff’s dog ran away from home, was taken by animal control, and subsequently transferred to an animal shelter for adoption after the three day holding period. Id. at 760. The plaintiff located the dog at the shelter weeks after the holding period expired and requested its return. Id. Pursuant to the shelter’s policy and city code, [FN39] the shelter informed the plaintiff it would sterilize the dog and the plaintiff would have to file for adoption. Id. at 761. Despite the plaintiff’s objections, the shelter in fact sterilized the dog before returning it. Id. The appellate court upheld the jury’s finding of negligence: “[o]nce Dickson claimed to be the true owner of the dog and requested that the dog, which had not been neutered at that time, not be altered, Humane could have simply refrained from taking any action until the controversy was resolved.” Id.

    While the court’s holding in Birmingham Humane Society contradicts the two previously discussed decisions as well as the plain language of the city code, the policy rationale of the decision is strong. No third party adopted the dog and both the original owner’s interest in retrieving his dog intact as well as the shelter’s interest in efficient management would have been served by returning the dog to the original owner without sterilization. Although there is at least some public interest in sterilizing pets in order to control the pet population, that interest appears relatively weak compared to the property interest involved.

    • Walt - yes that Walt August 15, 2014 at 4:04 am #


  4. Cindy (aka joeblow pet owner) August 15, 2014 at 12:57 am #

    Here is a link to the newscast in Columbus, Ohio.

  5. Jet August 15, 2014 at 2:35 am #

    I have been following this debacle and like many had questions – I am involved in sheltie rescue but also work closely with my breed group so I couldn’t understand the position of the rescue. Then I got onto this blog and while I could have done without the childish nastiness all the way through from both sides, I did the research that OhioRules suggested and sure enough, within 2 minutes I had found it. I have screen shots but can’t work out how to post here – I don’t know why the people who are referring to this evidence won’t post it themselves – it’s all very childish. But you just need to go to Ohio Sheltie Network’s facebook page, search for veronica, scroll down to December 2013 and you will see the post where Veronica is advertising Piper along with several other dogs as available for permanent rehome and then several posts about her settling in to her new home. It is very clear that Piper was rehomed on a permanent basis. Veronica herself makes this clear. That being said, the fact that she wants the dog back when the home didn’t work out is great and responsible and should be encouraged and supported by rescue orgs. Why she felt the need to pretend that the dog wasn’t rehomed is very strange and makes it difficult to believe anything in this case. But, it does not look like the dog is in danger or in a bad situation with Veronica, so the rescue should really give the dog back, shrug their shoulders and move on to worthier causes.

    • patti shanaberg August 15, 2014 at 5:18 am #

      I’ve said too many times to count that I’m waiting for the documented facts and stories from both sides under oath to come out in court, if it even makes it to court. I hope it does or we’ll never know.

      I was so happy to hear that Jet who was originally on the evil rescue band wagon discovered some pieces of factual information that opened her eyes. I’m still surprised that Jet has a firm opinion on what should happen based on what is still precious little factual information. If that little bit of information was able to shed a new light on the issue isn’t it at least possible there might be quite a bit more? It is definitely possible. However unlikely it may be it is certainly at least possible.

      The rescue’s attorney states in his public statement that there have been at least 6 different people claiming to be the “rightful owner” or “co-owner”. While co-owernship of show dogs and breeding dogs may be common, if it’s true that this dog had been re-homed numerous times that is clearly not the same thing. And 6??? A breeder willing to take a dog back is not the same thing as claiming to be the “rightful owner”. Obviously the rescue had to be careful about determining who the rightful owner really is and who the dog should be released to. They have no way of knowing the personal dynamics between these 6 people and how releasing the dog to one of them could cause a whole other fire storm of liability! They had only legal documentation to rely on which was open to interpretation, conflicting and confusing at best.

      After observing the ridiculously juvenile rabid attacks on this and other threads – based on reactive gossip on top of reactive gossip – it makes sense that they wouldn’t be quick too make that determination about who to release the dog to, if anyone. Then the outrageous cyber bullying and criminal attacks on the rescue! Good lord! I thought she was being ridiculous at first too. But my God. Grow up people and stop thinking you have a crystal ball and some how know what you couldn’t possibly know. And repeating gossip and hearsay as fact!

      And all the boo-hooing about poor Piper “languishing” and “wondering why his family isn’t picking him up” should have started way back when he was being bounced around from home to home so casually – if that’s true – which may be even worse than what has been reported so far. It’s possible. If all the re-homing that the breeder supposedly admitted to and is apparently evident for all to see is true that poor dog as been waiting for his family for a very long time – long before the poor thing ran away.

      If the breeder has had so much trouble finding a good home for the dog maybe the rescue IS the best entity to find a good home for the poor dog. It’s certainly at least possible.

      • Big bis August 15, 2014 at 7:07 am #

        Uuuhhhh Patti…if you have done all this research and have even watched this whole thread at all…surely you have realized that Piper is a SHE not a he… And while I see some irrelevant stuff being flung back and forth…my belief is that COSR can hardly claim harassment and bullying when they are continuing to engage in conversation with their so called internet bullys.
        Sorry …bottom line is the legal paperwork is still in the breeders name. Black and white… No grey shades here. Mud slinging aside…it doesn’t matter who says what or claims this or that. Unless someone can prove that registration was signed over before Piper was lost, Piper is property of the breeder

      • patti shanaberg August 15, 2014 at 6:19 pm #

        Once again, your “black and white” opinion is based on a very limited amount of information with a complete lack of respect for the unknown. “so called internet bullies” ??? That’s the one thing that there IS black and white evidence of – right in this thread!

      • Big bis August 15, 2014 at 6:53 pm #

        Yet again patti you try to claim to be middle of the road yet here you sit whining and crying about bullies….oh please…put on some big girl panties 🙂
        You are the one that is continuing to go round and round about information yet unknown. Who cares about any of it? Was Piper sold? Given away? Sterile? Breedable? Rehomed 6x? Who cares??
        I own a car…the title is on my name. It doesn’t matter who I loan, sell, or give it to. Until I sign over the title it belongs to me. I am responsible. Same thing here. The only reason all the stories are flying around is because COSR is trying to justify not giving the dog back…the only real question left to answer is why? Is it a moral issue? A biased personal issue? Or has something actually happened to the dog that they are trying to hide? If that’s it then this whole lawsuit is dragging on in the hopes that if COSR can win then they would avoid a very costly loss.
        That answer to that ultimate question is what we all sit and wait to find the answer to. The rest of the stories…nobody cares. Seriously.
        The truly tragic part of this whole mess is there are how many other dogs being kept by this rescue ? And how many will be finding homes with all this going on? This is not helping any dog!
        It needs to stop. For everyone’s sake …..most importantly for all the innocent dogs stuck in limbo.

      • patti shanaberg August 15, 2014 at 7:49 pm #

        I never claimed to be “middle of the road”. I claim to be waiting for the facts.

        I suppose different people have different definitions of what constitutes “bullying”. Pointing out the fact that people in this thread and others are drawing conclusions based on limited information isn’t “whining and crying” about anything but your characterization speaks volumes about you.

        I’m not the only one who is appalled at the behavior on this and other threads even among those who agree the rescue is in the wrong. That’s not “whining and crying”. It’s an opinion based on what I and others see – including your characterization.

        Opinions can be expressed without attempting to intimidate by hurling insults, name calling, and juvenile sarcasm. I doubt most of these people (you “big bis” included) would speak to others in person the way they comment on-line while hiding behind fake or incomplete names. It’s shameless and I’m surprised and certainly not proud I have allowed myself to be sucked into it to the extent that I have but I felt someone had to say something in defense of facts, truth, objectivity and the recognition that there is still very little information to form an opinion on.

        I encourage others to remind themselves every time they get so worked up that; “There is something about this situation I don’t know, the knowing of which could change everything.” At least until both sides of the story are told – which they still haven’t been. In cases of litigation it is not uncommon to say next to nothing until it all comes out in court because everything gets so twisted as is evident already. I hope to god it does go to court just for that reason. I have said nothing I would take back either way. I am admitting I don’t know – yet – unlike so many others who have imagined and convinced themselves they know enough and that there is nothing that might come out that could make things any different before the facts have even been presented.

        It’s worse than the telephone game children play – someone says something and by the time it reaches around 5 or 6 people it’s virtually unrecognizable from the original comment – except in this case it’s all the more toxic & poisoned by a vicious mixture of hypersensitivity based on previous experience, hostility and arrogance and in many cases, yes, bullying – all under the cowardly cover of anonymity. Very sad.

      • Becky B. August 15, 2014 at 8:20 am #

        In the absence of a signed contract of sale, it has customarily been the finding of several courts that in the case of dogs, AKC registration and licensing in the owner’s area of residence is definitive proof of ownership. Further, breeders of AKC dogs are instructed to transfer AKC registration, or provide application for registration (in the case of unregistered puppies) at time of sale. Since there have not heretofore been any parties come forward with a signed contract of sale of the dog in question (perhaps IF a contract does exist it will be produced in court), it goes to follow that the existing AKC registration is likely to be considered proof of ownership.

        The remaining decision to be made is one of property rights. Does an organization that exists to place dogs in new homes, having taken possession of the dog through legal means (although there is some question as to whether the appropriate actions were taken to validate the legality of the transfer from the shelter to the rescue in this case) have a greater claim of ownership then the original owner of record?

        Based on past judgements in many cases in the U.S. Judicial system, possession, even legal possession of the property of another individual does not confer ownership. Add to that the perhaps questionable transfer of the property in question from the Shelter to the Rescue organization, and the fact that the past owners of the dog are able to produce valid AKC registration, and valid Municipal Licenses for the dog in question, it is, in my OPINION very unlikely that COSR will prevail in court. Postings of offer to sell, as well as transfer of residence without a contract of sale is not likely to affect claim of ownership, especially considering that this IS a show dog, and it is common and certainly not unusual for such dogs to reside in any number of locations throughout their lifetime while still being legally owned by the parties holding the AKC registration.

      • patti shanaberg August 15, 2014 at 5:55 pm #

        And yet, once again, until all the facts are presented in court that opinion is still based on a limited amount of information.

      • Jet August 15, 2014 at 1:04 pm #

        I was never on an evil rescue band wagon. I said I couldn’t understand the position of the rescue given all of the public information available, so I sought more information. You are a very patronising person for someone whose position I was at least partly supporting.

        I absolutely do understand why they might not have relinquished the dog immediately given the number of people who apparently stepped up, but whether there started out being 6 people claiming ownership or not, there only appears to be one prepared to go the distance now so the rescue really has to let that argument go.

        And you know what, as a non-breeder/show person in sheltie rescue I will never understand the way that show and breeding dogs are handed around, I really won’t. I do dog sports and when my dogs retire, they retire to the lounge, not someone else’s home. However, it is a common and legal practice and I’m not sure who COSR think they are to act as a judge and jury on that practice. Perhaps the dog was in poor health? That has not been claimed by any of the people supposedly in the know. The argument that the dog has been passed around too much is the only one I am hearing consistently, and while I abhor the practice myself, I just don’t think it is reason to withhold a dog. Are there better homes for Piper? Probably. But I could walk down my street and steal every dog on it and find it a better home – it’s not my right to do that. The home appears to be acceptable, that should be enough to return it.

        I am sure that COSR, like most rescues, strives for better than acceptable when adopting their dogs out, but in this case it isn’t their dog to do that with – at least not morally. legally is still to be decided. My opinion is not absolute, and if at any time more information is released from either side besides the childish nonsense I am seeing, then I will review it. But that’s where I’m at now.

      • patti shanaberg August 15, 2014 at 5:49 pm #

        I apologize for the “evil rescue bandwagon” reference if it doesn’t fit in your case Jet. My only position all along is the fact that we don’t have the facts. We have a lot of claims (including misrepresentations) on the part of the breeder and next to nothing from the rescue. I commend you for seeking more information but you do still seem to be forming fairly strong opinions based on what little is known in spite of so much that is not known. Just because you discovered one piece of information that doesn’t make a substantial difference, that doesn’t mean there may not be a whole lot more that would make a difference. I’m only using your comments as an example of what nearly everyone is doing. You to a lesser extent but still doing it. This is not personal for me. It’s a matter of principle – based on what I SEE people are writing and saying not on speculation and gossip. I am certainly not defending this rescue, especially based on how it LOOKS, I am only defending the respect for what is NOT known, and couldn’t possibly be known yet, over attack based on vicious gossip, assumptions, speculation and a complete disregard for what isn’t and can not yet be known.

  6. ProudK911 August 15, 2014 at 6:00 am #

    Coming from someone who has been involved in about every facet of dogs, from breeder/exhibitor volunteering for a national level club (treasurer), to a national breed rescue (vice-president)- for another breed of course, to working for both government animal control (assistant warden) & private shelters and also being a veterinary technician, perhaps I have a different take on this situation. Here’s what I see y’all:
    This never should have happened. Period. The Franklin County AC had no damned business releasing a permanently identified dog without observing the legal retention period for such identified animals- at least without calling the vet’s office to whom the chip was registered (if not permanently registered to the owner- which is just so the owner gets the call directly instead of the implanter receiving the call; proof of ownership/individual identification is made by THE PRESENCE OF that microchip) couldn’t it have waited a matter of HOURS to release Piper and this been avoided? If this were my ship, I’d have the FCAC on my list next. They were definitely negligent by not taking reasonable care when provided with a lead on a permanently identified dog (or any animal).
    Furthermore, this whole case could hinge on whether the FCAC transfers dogs to breed rescues, or whether they are adopted to rescues. When they are “transferred” to rescue, the transferer still exercises dispositional control over said animal which was transferred to different housing during the said holding period (in this case, 14 days); after such time the rescue is able to adopt them out as they see fit. Adoption to rescue allows the rescue to dispose of the dog as the rescue sees fit. Which is irrelevant in this case, as Piper is still awaiting disposition! Blows my mind (as a former board member of a 501c3 national level breed rescue) that a rescue would not choose to reunite any dog with its breeder (aka the person responsible for why that dog walks this earth at all, and therefore ought to be ” responsible” for their products), saving time, effort, and funds, all while opening up a foster slot for a dog who truly has no where else to go? Especially when that breeder is working with a “problem” dog (which may or may not be true in Piper’s case) and the dog may be a difficult placement- what rescue hasn’t had an animal who gets returned? Or twice… Many times, a dog is leased out to handlers/temporary co-owners so that the person the dog is staying with has legal ability to 1) make claim to the dog, and, 2) make medical decisions for the dog. Whether people think that is moral or ethical or not is truly a judgement call; but good discernment says that Veronica is worried about providing proper legal care even (in addition to the rest) to see Piper was always safe (so she thought sadly wrongly) if Piper ever needed her. Many/most breeders don’t go through the trouble. It takes money to register a lease and make it worth the paper it was written on. I’d bet dollars to doughnuts that Veronica’s sale contract requires her pups come back to her if they ever need re-homing. That is part of the definition of a responsible breeder. That Veronica may have used poor discernment when she may or may not have said the dog was with a sitter, or whatever, regardless of the true situation on who Piper was staying with, the fact remains that Veronica is a LEGAL owner of Piper at this current time. Veronica felt Piper was valuable enough to implant a microchip in her; being sure Piper wouldn’t be a burden to the shelter system ever because of the presence of that microchip her veterinarian implanted.
    This whole debacle is a missed opportunity for excellent breeder-rescue PR. It could have been the feel-good story of the week: Breeder at nationals while Champion gets lost and found…
    Had COSR decided to return Piper, it would have helped to strengthen breeder-rescue relations, in a time where they are suffering due to the ARO agendas and the drift from common purpose. Rescues became necessary once some breeders lost their responsibility to their products/creations/ whatever they’re puppies; breeders in it for the “right reasons” are truly stewards to their chosen breed– meaning they feel responsible for the betterment of all (in this case) Shelties. Including those who have not an ethical & responsible breeder. A well-publicized reunion would have helped remind both rescues and breeders what it’s all about. Not to mention that COSR’s coffers would surely have benefited. Since it’s all about the dogs. (But that’s a tangent I’m too wise to touch). But, then with the breed rescue I worked with, it wasn’t as horrible a worry about money (we had breeder support financially plus donations- all with a reasonable adoption fee!) as it was having enough foster homes to put everyone in until they could be adopted out.
    Using my own discernment, I think it would have been win-win for everyone to have just released Piper to her breeder (and still owner) when she came calling. To fight a legal battle based on “judgement calls” which apparently are gleaned from FB- that must be right up there with Dr. Google on the tops on authority(!) is just a real dead-end for COSR. Like literally. COSR has already suffered a loss of their board, members of their org; by adding this is certain suicide for what is left of the rescue. (Perhaps that’s the plan since “headquarters” is for sale by owner in current photographs?). To follow this course of actions has severely damaged the strained relations between breeder and rescue. The current trend has been to find a new thoughtfully bred puppy through the responsible ethical breeder (where ethics is defined by the buyer only), where the buyer gets a healthy (guaranteed) well-adjusted puppy who will have a predictable adult size & base temperament who always has a home no matter what. It’s already been happening… I don’t guess many people consider why it’s so very rare that the good-quality representatives of a breed show up in rescue (hint!hint!- cuz when they do get lost and brought to a shelter, they are most often claimed! New stats out in VPN magazine). Responsibly bred dogs are going to be identified and claimed, if only by the breeder, and rehomed privately. Like rescue before it became a necessity to be an independently organized entity. Heck, I could start a rescue right now if I wanted. Even a Sheltie rescue (and I’d never have one cuz Shelties aren’t for me!). It don’t take much but volunteers. Thank God (or whomever) for yahoogroups! What a life saver! OMG before the advent of “packages” for telephones the long distance bills! (LOL but true)
    I just have a hard time understanding why COSR has chosen this course of action , being able to predict the outcome.
    The saddest part of all is that Piper is in a place taking up needed rescue space instead of being with her breeder who she knows and is cared about enough to be fought for. All because of reckless and blatant disregard of the laws first by a government entity and then by a private rescue…

    • Nora August 15, 2014 at 6:16 am #

      Hey, I was all done with this but I am enamored of your perspective, so thanks!

    • patti shanaberg August 15, 2014 at 6:56 am #

      Nobody understands “why COSR has chosen this course of action”. All the more reason to respect the fact that there is more to this story than has been publicly reported. Whatever that is it may or may not make a legal difference or a difference of public opinion. But people have gone absolutely crazy over gossip. I’m suspicious whenever someone misrepresents themselves – especially so dramatically and publicly.

      • Linda Medero August 16, 2014 at 4:43 am #

        You know, from my perspective, I think that the core of the anger about Penny’s actions has to do with trying to take this issue to its logical conclusion 1) the shelter legally let the dog go to a rescue 2) the rescue legally took her for foster and re-homing 3) the rescue, by the very nature of its reason to exist will re-home her 3) the rescue will ask for applications for adoption 4) one of the applicants will be her breeder 5) the rescue will give her to…. who? a stranger that never knew her, or the breeder that produced her???

        If Penny believes that the breeder (Veronica) is a less fit owner than a total stranger, then the breeder must be the Michael Vick of Shelties in order to be denied. Or Penny has a personal vendetta against Veronica or Penny thinks she can make more money from a legally owned rescue to a stranger than the original breeder would pay or it’s more fun to bash the breeder for producing an “unwanted” dog.

        That to me is the sticking point. If your reason for existence is to re-home dogs, then re-home them in as expediently and reasonably as possible!

        You may have a technical right to something, but in the common sense world… why would you deny a person their desire which would fulfill your reason for existence unless it is for a greater need… Penny’s need for money, vengeance or… what?? Again… ESPECIALLY since the purpose to a rescue is to find a home for an UNWANTED dog.

        But she (Penny) chooses to leave her reasons unspecified and that just fuels the fire.

  7. justhereforthedrama August 15, 2014 at 12:23 pm #

    “but Piper is not a shitty BYB Sheltie who ended up in a home with some yokels. She’s a much-loved champion dog from a good breeder who happened to get lost”

    ANY dog, regardless of it’s background, should be returned to owners that want it back. Being an expensive show dog doesn’t make the situation any more serious then if it was a “shitty BYB sheltie”.

  8. Kit Clover August 15, 2014 at 12:45 pm #

    To everyone who said she posted a $10,000 bond- this is false. Penny only had to front $200 to a bond company and they paid the rest. If she loses the company goes after her and her assests.

  9. TerrierGal August 15, 2014 at 6:10 pm #

    I have nothing to add to this insane thread, but this being The Dog Snobs blog, I kept waiting for someone to point this hilarious quote made by the troll (AKA OhioRules!) in reply to a comment on the night of 8/12. Since no one did, I will. OhioRules! said “Piper was rehomed because she kills puppies. IF the breeder is not going to quit breeding, the safest place for her (AND THE PUPPIES SHE’S KILLED IN THE PAST) is right where she is.”. Whether the the claim behind this statement is true or not is irrelevant. Just want to point out that OhioRules! stated that puppies that are already dead will now be safe if Piper is kept right where she is. LOL!!! WTF????

    • OhioRules! August 16, 2014 at 1:27 am #

      Glad I’m not the only one entertained by this whole thing. You’re welcome.

  10. Big bis August 15, 2014 at 10:37 pm #

    So everyone who is sitting all calm and collected….content to just sit by and wait for court proceedings to drag out. Let me inform you of why Piper supporters are in such an uproar and why the huge big push to hurry up and return her….Piper is not just a “pet”….Piper is a show dog !! Show dog up keep is a constant on going process. Teeth, nails, training, grooming….all this is done constantly on a show dog. Are Piper’s teeth being cleaned regularly to keep from tooth loss? Is her coat conditioned and properly cared for? Pets can be cut down to make it easier but show dogs MUST be in full coat. Is she being fed proper high grade pro food? Or some crap off the grocery store shelf? Are her nails getting kept trimmed so no damage to her feet happens? Her continued training and temperament are also a huge issue. Is she being socialized properly? Is she traumatized and afraid? Nobody knows…that’s the huge problem!
    When you hold a newborn puppy in your hand day after day, watch her grow and thrive, train with her everyday , brush and blow dry and fluff her coat for years….your heart and soul goes into that dog. All that work could be totally destroyed with this whole process. Show dogs are pets also but extra special care is given to details that don’t really matter that much to the average dog owner. The longer this drags on the more likely that Piper will never be able to return to competition. Hopefully most can now see why this is far more upsetting than just a fight over custody of a dog

    • OhioRules! August 16, 2014 at 12:45 am #

      If Piper was a ‘show dog’, you’d think she would have went along to the nationals with the breeder. I think despite the tearful “bed buddy” comment on the newscast, this might be the first time Piper has slept on anyone’s bed in months, maybe years. And since Veronica herself posted the ad on Ohio Sheltie Network and a followup to the new OWNERS back in December, she should really stop already with the whole “Easter Weekend Petsitter” story. It’s just making even the people who were on the fence wonder why there needed to be a lie at all about where the dog was.

      • JB August 16, 2014 at 3:33 am #

        Once again showing your ignorance. It is an expensive proposition to show a dog at the National. Most dogs stay home. Only those that are in perfect condition, correct seasonal coat are shown in any given year.

      • Big bis August 16, 2014 at 3:51 am #

        Wow ! Ohio…you just showed how little you know about show dogs!! Piper is a champion of record. She may not have been on a current campaign but that doesn’t mean she couldn’t be used. National competition is where people bring our their young puppies and their biggest baddest specials (champions of record). Most host hotels have a limit on how many dogs per room so only select few dogs ever get to go to national. Go back to your hole, you are amusing only yourself with your ignorance. Obviously you think this whole thing is amusing, I’m so glad to know that your so called supporters are dwindling at a fast and furious rate. It’s everywhere….stories and blogs all over. News reports…and not one can I find in your defense??!! Interesting…but certainly not amusing

      • OhioRules! August 16, 2014 at 11:27 pm #

        thank you JB for the explanation of the show comment. She wasn’t in a show home, but that makes sense. Big bis, keep reading all the blogs and the news stories. i’ll read the court report at the end.

  11. BrokenHeart August 16, 2014 at 5:03 am #

    The lack of ability to reason things out, in the face of righteousness, is almost unfathomable. This whole thing about Piper having been “GIVEN” away… (not that the agreement between the parties was made public.) Even assuming all the claims of VC having “re-homed” Piper in December of 2013, are accurate….

    1) What difference does it make whether money changed hands or not? Isn’t it better to exchange the hopes of a good and competent home for any dog, than to extract a high fee? If the dog is “valuable” she is no less valuable if her breeder would rather see her in a good situation than make money from any agreement that exists between herself and the placement.

    2) If a rescue makes use of “foster” homes, what is to prevent a breeder do something similar? I knew a breeder who would often allow her dogs to spend time with me for various reasons and for varying periods of time. The dogs still belonged to HER, but I was in charge of the dogs’ wellbeing while they were with me. Whose business is it anyway?

    3) Who’s to say that the situation simply did not work out and that Piper came back to VC before she left on her trip? In which case how unlikely is it that the services of a “pet-sitter” (of some description or another) were actually used?

    So far, I have not seen any arguments for the rescue for keeping Piper which are solid enough to warrant this massive undertaking.

    I may be dating myself but “something is (definitely) rotten in Denmark” as they say.

    I feel very sorry for poor Piper … It is hard to believe that she is getting the care she needs if she while being cared for by someone under THIS much stress… (unless, of course, it is the very creation of “this much stress” that allows the person (who is caring for her) to function better… And that, in and of itself, would be purely tragic!!

    • patti shanaberg August 21, 2014 at 4:46 pm #

      According to the blogger this was NOT created by the rescue: “Please note, I am not affiliated with COSR or any other breed rescue, I am just a supporter of rescue and ‘good’ breeders. I do not like to see good people preyed upon for a cause that is not worthy of their time and energy, and one that has not been portrayed honestly to those who have jumped on the ‘Save Piper’ bandwagon.”

      • Bigbis August 21, 2014 at 4:57 pm #

        So if the poster of this blog is in no way associated with COSR then how were they able to get information pertaining to their point of view when all along COSR has stated that they will not share those views with the public? So now all of the sudden they are all about sharing? And with a total stranger…not the news media mine you…but some random individual who is stirring up support from such high class groups as the “I hate dog breeders” page. Real nice group of people…but on the plus side we now know why this is all happening.

      • patti shanaberg August 21, 2014 at 5:24 pm #

        Yes, I saw that too – (the I Hate Dog Breeders page liked by that page) – that’s a real shame. That is what makes it even more believable that the rescuer is not behind it. She couldn’t possibly be that stupid. I’m still eager for all the true facts to come out in court – documented under oath. I hope it gets to court. I don’t think much of either party at this point – all the snark in the blog certainly doesn’t help her case. But maybe she doesn’t have anything to do with it – which is why gossip and 2nd and 3rd hand information is so damaging. Whoever did that blog and that page did her more harm than good. I only feel for poor Piper and hope someone finds a loving home for her.

    • ProudK911 August 21, 2014 at 11:17 pm #

      Hmmm… Why would people who “hate dog breeders” even be involved in this situation, as they must also be dog haters too?
      News flash… That dog laying at your feet had someone who allowed their dog to breed (or purposely did so). Dogs come about as the result of being bred by people, commonly referred to as breeders. !
      No reputable rescue (especially a breed rescue!) would deny a breeder/owner their property. Feelings of moral superiority don’t supersede legal proof-of-ownership.
      What a waste of a little rescue to sink themselves publicly, financially, ethically, and to hurt the face of good rescues everywhere.

      • patti shanaberg August 21, 2014 at 11:28 pm #

        “No reputable rescue (especially a breed rescue!) would deny a breeder/owner their property. Feelings of moral superiority don’t supersede legal proof-of-ownership.”- ? First of all, “legal proof-of-ownership” is yet to be determined by the courts based on evidence, not emotionally charged gossip. I would hope PLENTY of reputable rescues would deny PLENTY of breeder/owner’s their right to a dog. “Ownership” by a breeder or otherwise is no proof of a suitable, safe or certainly not loving home. I agree that this blogger certainly did this rescue a disservice with all her snark but the facts have yet to be determined and no one on this blog has produced any more credible evidence or facts in support of the breeder than she has in support of the owner. This should not be a debate of breeder vs. rescue – only THIS breeder vs THIS rescue in THIS case – as evidenced by facts not gossip.

      • julie August 22, 2014 at 12:43 am #

        patti Sandberg wrote:”I would hope PLENTY of reputable rescues would deny PLENTY of breeder/owner’s their right to a dog. “Ownership” by a breeder or otherwise is no proof of a suitable, safe or certainly not loving home.”

        I find these two sentences absolutely terrifying. The mere fact you wrote them, and sadly, that some might agree with you is a gosh darn crying shame.

        The fifth amendment guarantees: “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”. The notion that animal control officers or rescue organizations can confiscate property and circumvent due process should be of concern to all.

      • patti shanaberg August 22, 2014 at 1:24 am #

        First of all, my last name is NOT Sandberg! Second of all, there are many horrific breeders and owners – such dog fighting participants, Puppy Mill breeders, hoarders and other abusive people who have no business owning dogs. Those are the owners and breeders I was speaking of. And I most certainly meant it – there are definitely people in this world who should NOT be allowed to own dogs regardless of “property rights”. And finally, I said nothing about “circumventing due process”. There are no warrants for anyone’s arrest yet in this case and due process is being followed so far. So let due process take it’s course.

      • julie August 22, 2014 at 2:12 am #

        Patti Shanaberg I apologize for error on your name. I’d actually typed it correctly but the darn auto-correct (which I don’t always notice) decided that your last name was misspelled! It tried to correct it again while typing this reply.

        I also apologize if I took your statement more broadly than you’d intended. It just scares the be-jeebes out of me that animal control and rescues are, in some cases, given the authority to confiscate animals without the owners actually being charged. I wasn’t specifically speaking on the piper incident.

        If a person is guilty (and found guilty) of animal cruelty then by all means, they lose their rights of animal ownership. I support bringing these cases to trial.

        However, there are more and more reports of rescue raids:

        Again, I’m not taking specifically about piper’s situation, only dog ownership in general and how fragile our rights as property owners can be. Infringement or erosion of those rights should not be willingly given.

      • patti shanaberg August 22, 2014 at 5:15 am #

        I appreciate the appology. I’m generally not sensitive about my name but do not want to be confused with Penny Sandbrink. I use my own name and I am a real person – not pretending to be anyone other than I am.

        While I know “rescue raids” happen (and are horrible) the article you posted boasts a lot of extreme inflamatory opinions and gossip not unlike these blogs – vilifying all animal rights organizations? I’m sick to death of people complaining about HSUS – they do excellent work and yes I HAVE done my research. Anyone who starts referencing links or phony misleading information from that godawful “HumaneWatch” where the vast majority of BS can be traced back to – THEY need to do some research on that organization, what’s behind it and Rick Berman.

      • Linda Medero August 22, 2014 at 2:24 am #

        People who hate dog breeders are involved because they believe if they stop EVERY dog breeder there will be no unwanted dogs left. In that, they are correct.

        What they fail to understand is that, by that time there will be NO DOGS AT ALL!

        They think we can pick up where we left off with frozen sperm and a few good surrogates, I guess.

        What they DON’T understand is constantly “saving” these unwanted dogs (and now imported from other countries because we don’t have enough, screwy but true!) is simply feeding the need for more, poorly bred dogs (“Oh, poor doggie, I need to save him!” “Oh, boy, let’s produce more sick dogs!”)

        The only way to stop the madness is to produce good, healthy dogs because people WANT DOGS…. and that ain’t gonna stop folks!!!!

        Well, unless you are PeTA or HSUS…. then they will just wipe them all off the face of the planet!

        Are all “show breeders” great? Hardly! Are all BYB the Satan incarnate, no, they just need to understand there is more to breeding than putting 2 dogs together and making $$$. If they don’t change their habits, don’t F**king buy from them!

        Educate buyers what to look for.

        You have to ask yourself what is required to produce good, healthy stock . Start there. Honesty, transparency in production, guarantees, standing by their product more than the “required” 72 hours, COME ON! THINK! LOGICAL! COMMON SENSE!!


        How about people who do what it takes to say “I may not know it all, but if I produce shit, I’ll take it back no matter when and give you your money back” ??

        No excuses, no, “it’s not a good time to take a dog back”. (Been there)

        No, “I don’t have your money”. (Don’t think I haven’t been there!)

        No, “it’s too much trouble” (Yup heard that too)

        Breeders, take the dog back, here’s your money, puppy buyer, so sorry it didn’t work out.

        Seriously, we take buying a live animal less seriously in this country than buying an inanimate object like a car!

        Yes, every puppy buyer I sell to, says the same thing, “It will never happen, she’ll never come back.” Guess what? They still get a guarantee. And if I sell 50 puppies and 48 are returned for some reason or another… I must be doing something TERRIBLY wrong. And having that return rate would be hard to ignore. I would be out of the dog breeding endeavor or I would straighten up and get my act in gear.

        Get the dog buyers to ask for more…

        Unless, of course, your goal is to try to feel HOLIER THAN THOU the easy way, in which case, march on, point fingers, be more of the problem than the solution.

        I, for one sell only dogs that I am willing to take back if unwanted… expect to take back if unwanted … DEMAND to take back if unwanted.

        The only ones that want their 6 year old, possibly sterile (but who knows), bitch back are breeders that care about the soul that is encased in that fur.

        So, if a rescue has a dog that a breeder wants back, trust me, it is no Lancaster farmer / puppy mill breeder that wants her back for breeding. He has moved on to younger stock. Easier, cheaper, less bother for him.

      • patti shanaberg August 22, 2014 at 5:05 am #

        The only people I have as little respect for as those who hate dog breeders (and I don’t respect those who hate all breeders) are people who hate HSUS. I’m sick to death of people criticizing HSUS. HSUS does excellent work in spite of MILLIONS of Big AG corporate dollars fighting them and lying about them (and themselves) for their own selfish greed. People should do their research on the #1 critic where the vast majority of negative information about HSUS comes from – the lovely “HumaneWatch” – talk about evil incarnate – do some research on “HumaneWatch” and Rick Berman who is behind it all. Follow the money. Get the whole picture. HSUS may not be perfect and I understand people think they should contribute more to rescue but they are doing excellent work undercover to expose puppy mills and factory farms and influence legislation. That whole conversation disgusts me and is enough to make me hate those breeders and those rescues as well just for their paranoid self obsessed inability to see the big picture.

      • ProudK911 August 22, 2014 at 3:47 am #

        Thank you Linda for saying what John Q pet owner needs to know!
        Perhaps a positive side effect of people’s new-found fear of adopting someone else’s wanted dog, they will seek out a responsible breeder instead.
        There are plenty of breeders who follow both a responsible and ethical breeding plan/program, across many breeds, offering proper and correct representatives of the breed the buyer has chosen. Breeders who have a NQA return policy for any reason, and honor it… Even twice on one dog (where the second owner died), who offer a nose to tail genetic guarantee, plus an extended time for the considered “main” problem in the breed, who share genetic information, who always have time for both the pet and the showing buyers. Breeders who keep their dogs through thick and thin, from their first breath til their last, who are breeding purpose bred dogs that are more than just a pretty face! I should know, I am one of them who has my family of dogs because it’s my hobby, I endlessly pour all my money and time into them (and love it).
        And bringing me to a side point:
        John Q pet owner and those one step above fail to realize the time effort and funding that goes into having a show dog. (And that’s not the emotional investment if you are said dog’s breeder too as in this case with Piper!). Hey ladies- if you were to think that getting your hair brushed, regular bathing, frequent pedicures, dental care, and to be generally pampered is bad, then you might think the life of a show dog isn’t so good. If you are one who sees no benefit to the training it takes for a dog to become a “show dog” doesn’t benefit, create & strengthen the bond/relationship between dog and person, you’re really missing something.
        John Q pet owner has no clue what it means for your life to revolve around your dogs and all your resources going into said dogs. (And for those who think it’s easy to breed a litter… Well save your pennies first! And hey- prenatal care?). And John Q doesn’t have to. That’s why he chooses to shop at a responsible breeder who is proving their purpose bred dogs and stewarding the breed while it is in the breeder’s hands and beyond.
        Am I the only one who seemed to notice that it is rather possible and plausible that in Piper’s case, she was placed to be cared for FOR FREE as she wasn’t being sold, and placed as a result of (allegedly) killing another bitch’s puppies? Was it not the right & responsible thing to do for Veronica to find placement/caretakers for Piper and subsequent litters of puppies born in her program?
        If indeed, Piper had been in 3 homes in one year, well hey- that isn’t so different than what rescue does, but it would appear Veronica is doing it without being a burden on the system! So a dog loses its home, is placed in rescue (or returned to breeder by contract), and then re-homed with an appropriate situation. One, two, three. Hmmph. I guess if 3 homes in a year are a bad thing, the system needs to be redesigned for those dogs who are displaced for any reason. Yuh-huh.
        It remains a fear in the back of my mind of how indoctrinated people have become to the ARO agendas.
        It would have been such a simple thing to promote “buy from a responsible breeder” as an effective means of making dogdom “work” instead of fueling the ARO agenda fires as happened during America’s overpopulation days. Hey another news flash: those days are over for now folks. Not likely to return with the coming outbreaks of preventable disease which are being carried in with the animals being imported to our country! Confirmed rabies y’all. Not to mention literally everything else dogs can get that we had controlled… With the bright idea of people choosing not to vaccinate their pets for anything not ever (cuz ALL VAX are bad you know), we will be seeing those dogs suffer at the negligence of their owners…
        Another thing, am I the only one who has noticed that Piper was TRANSFERRED TO RESCUE and not ADOPTED OUT?!? The animal shelter still reserved the right to dispose of her when Veronica called to claim Piper. COSR was never within their rights in the first place to withhold Veronica’s claimed property; and I’m sure the shelter thought, when they passed the rescue information on to Veronica, that COSR would release the dog to its legal owner…
        Furthermore, a court will not issue a replevin order without being presented significant proof of ownership to show rights to said property in the first place either. Obviously that a judgment was made, Veronica indeed satisfy the court that she does own the dog in question. (But why Penny chose to seek a counter bond is the $64,000 question my dear reader- why not just cut bait and call the case a rescue success = reclaimed by owner?)
        I know I’m one of the majority who are wondering where Piper has been through all of this, and why it seems no one has seen her or even knows her whereabouts, or of her welfare.
        No matter whether we do or do not care for Veronica’s sales or homing policies (whatever they may be), has no bearing legally. And what about the other side of the spectrum that shows a breeder who is willing to go to bat for one of her puppies? Who keeps her pups out of the system as to not be a burden? Who sticks it out for her pups thick and thin, even when a placement fails. (Oh and breeders use foster programs as well- in no way, shape, nor form are the people the dog resides with the owners, they are caretakers only and know it going into the deal. It is very successful for the breeder who wants their show dogs in loving pet homes, and the loving pet home likes the idea of Fluffy bringing home the ribbons and knowing they have a quality dog of their representative breed…. Win win for all- especially the individual dogs who have a full & rich life weekdays and weekends!)
        So, chew on that fat, y’all
        Jen P (insert titles here) & her (and here) Pack (also here)

      • patti shanaberg August 22, 2014 at 4:49 am #

        Yes, that’s a very lovely picture you paint for us all – as if we weren’t already aware of any of that – and as if we (at least I) am not aware that’s the possibility in this case also. But you don’t have the proof of that pretty picture being true in this case any more than the rescue supporters gossiping on their own blogs have any proof otherwise. We’ll all just have to wait until the facts of THIS case are presented in court. I hope your pretty picture is the case and Piper will go home to loving connections. And I also hope rescues will continue to be very careful about returning a dog to a questionable owner – questionable in this case simply by virtue of the fact that at least 6 different people were claiming to be the “rightful owner”. How would anyone like it if we were unreachable or didn’t have our name registered as the owner on the microchip as this one didn’t and came to awareness only after the rescue returned the dog to someone else claiming to be the “rightful owner”? There are many possibilities everyone taking this whole situation so personally and being so defensive about their own imagined positions aren’t even bothering to consider.

      • Linda Medero August 22, 2014 at 12:16 pm #

        Well said, ProudK911. I think this situation if it actually ever makes it nationally as a story, may open some people’s eyes about the problems encountered with obtaining a dog through either means, breeder or rescue. Over time, I think things will get better as the public gets educated. As far as your questions about Piper being placed for free, I found it interesting that Veronica is called a greedy breeder (making money from puppies I guess?) in the same breath as being called uncaring for NOT making money on Piper by placing her for free. Yes, it is very plausible she “placed” Piper instead of selling her, retaining ownership of the bitch. Quite in the same manner that COSR’s contract apparently retains ownership of a dog for life in spite of adopting them out. As far as the 6 owners claiming one dog, has anyone read any posts by the other 5 claiming to also be the owners? I would think if they were concerned about their lost property someone would have seen or read something by now.

  12. rhonda October 20, 2014 at 2:07 am #

    It’s unfortunate that when I started to read all about Piper, COSR and the owner of Piper, that the first thing that came to my head was………This very well could be an insurance scam. Yes, breeders insure their the show dogs, and yes, if the show dog(s) no longer produce what the breeders want, then they sell, or GIVE the dog away after spaying or neutering the dog. So, with this being said, did anyone else think of this. The dog, just happens to escape, and what happens to a large percentage of dogs who escape? They get hit, and die, or a person takes them it in and keeps it, or they are taken to a shelter. Now, if a dogs escapes, it’s usually on a run and doesn’t know anything but GO and the next thing you know, it’s hit. Pretty good chance of that in Columbus too. I just wonder, if Piper wasn’t suppose to be found or ever come back alive. Why my thinking? Because I have yet to find anything concrete. If my dog sitter did not let me know IMMEDIATELY that my dog was missing, and it took me 3 days (and now I have seen a week or two) before I could get my dog, shelter, dog sitters home, or whatever the case may be, then there is a problem. No, I am not a breeder, and no I did not get my sheltie from a shelter. After reading what bit that I could stomach, this idea is what popped into my head. There are some shady people out there (not that Pipers mother was or was not) and not one person, from what I could see, had looked into the fact that this could have been a scam. I do not know where Piper is now, if this matter has all been resolved or not, but I pray Piper is happy, has a home and in good health. I believe this story has brought some issues to the fore front and that a possible insurance scam is not too far from becoming a reality. Hey, if a man can murder his wife for money, or a woman can murder her husband for money, then a breeder can set up some elaborate skeem for money. But, I will say this, if the rescue site had some kind of ego trip or a trick up their sleeve, then by golly every penny that was donated to them should be paid back to those donors, investigated for possible embezzlement, and shut down, which would be a horrible shame. Hey, I am new here, and do not want anybody jumping down my throat for thinking outside the box. I just recently lost my sheltie and came across the Piper story. I have donated to COSR recently and this story rather bothers me. It is a damn shame that you don’t know who to believe but something shady was, or still is, going on. I guess if I thought that a dog breeder was up to something and I had her dog in my possession, I would put up the $10,000 too because I can guarantee you all, that if that would have been my ALLIE, come hell or high water would you be keeping her, and as far as that friend or dog sitter……….yep, I would have your a.. too. More than one to skin a cat and this story is one of the saddest stories I have ever come across. It is a shame that one dog, one beautiful dog, has to be the center of this kind of attention and not center of attention for what that breed actually represents. This kind of publicity has shot down breeder and rescue sites reputations and puts people like me, who is interested in bringing home another sheltie, on the fence of where to go to get another baby. Who ever is at fault here, should be held accountable and shamed. As far as Piper is concerned, You go Girl. You are now the poster child for SHELTIES SPECIAL VICTIMS UNIT.

  13. Kathryn December 14, 2014 at 2:14 am #

    I think what frightens the majority of us dog owners when reading of this situation is that we realize that even though we consider ourselves responsible dog owners and have our dogs microchipped, that this could easily happen to us.

    • ProudK911 December 14, 2014 at 6:40 pm #

      It frightened me enough to do my homework! I went looking at some of the rules/regulations concerning microchips and their use in dogs for permanent identification, and surprisingly, found that BOTH the AKC and APHIS consider the implantation of a microchip to be considered means of permanent identification of that animal. The microchip does NOT have to be registered to be considered acceptablet permanent identification for EITHER AKC or APHIS. I was both surprised & delighted to hear that, as every pup I sell is already “wearing” a microchip before they go. The new owner is required to register the chip in their own name, but until they do, the chip lot is in MY name and my pup will never be displaced when lost.
      It is so sad that I had to refresh myself on some of these important laws because I read of Piper’s story in late spring. I am from another breed, and don’t know Vanessa; but I know there are those of you here who do, so please pass this on: If the federal government accepts an implanted microchip as permanent identification, there is no reason that COSR shouldn’t have, and certainly no judge locally who won’t disagree with federal mandate ( and FCAC should have been brought in to force COSR to replenish Piper in the first place that they still had dispositional control at that time, having TRANSFERRED Piper to rescue, not ADOPTED her out!)!!
      For the people liking to dance around using the “6 supposed owners”.: it is actually POSSIBLE for that to be on an AKC registered dog, just so you know, though we know in this case, Vanessa is Piper’s owner, as a COURT OF LAW found sufficient proof to even issue the replevin order much less its continued appearances in court. Give Thanks that continuance is up later this week, is it not?

      • Patti ss December 14, 2014 at 6:57 pm #

        This case aside, generally speaking: Its very difficult and time consuming for anyone to find the so called owner if the microchip is not registered. AKC is irrelevant. If the federal government or APHIS considers an unregistered microchip proof of ownership it is still common sense that if you want to be notified in case of loss or emergency and you want the right to make decisions as the owner that you would register the chip in your name. If a dog is sold, the breeder who may have implanted the chip certainly has no right to claim ownership for the entire life of that dog.

      • Linda Medero December 14, 2014 at 7:05 pm #

        Pre trial was Dec 11, trial set for March 12


  1. What’s Piper’s Real Story? A Story of Breeder Greed and Bullying | Keep Piper Safe - August 20, 2014

    […] The original post on the blog made by ‘Piper’s Owner’ seems to have been deleted, but you can see the quote of it HERE. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: