As per this post, which seems to have everyone in an uproar, I have only one question:
Why did she keep a pack of hunting bassets in a city like Philadelphia?
***
I’m not upset that she got in trouble for breaking the law. I’m upset that this pack got broken up, and they will lose their gonads. She was being horribly irresponsible. Horribly.
And that’s one fewer working (English) basset pack. There goes a reserve of working basset bloodlines.
I don’t know of all the facts in this case, but it seems there were more practical solutions to this problem than breaking up the pack. Those are my two cents. Of course, the owner could have just moved out of Philadelphia– you know, to a place with thickets full of cottontails.
And that means that we’re one step closer to having only this kind of basset:
Nota bene: I’m not a libertarian or one of those anti-government types who doubts where the president (who I voted for) was born.
Nota bene II: I hate living in even the smallest city. I really do. I’m never happy in the city. The only place worse than the city for me would be the suburbs. I also don’t like places that are arid or places where there are no forests– so I’m an Easterner by default. It actually took me three trips to Arizona before I could appreciate its beauty. Not insulting Arizona, but I find forested green mountain vistas and New England seascapes more aesthetically pleasing.
Yes, there are too many goddamn people in this country.
***
Update:
1. Here are my views on the subject at hand. It was the pack’s owner’s responsiblity to be within the code. If you break the law, there are consequences.
2. However, the authorities enforced the in such a way that is more than a little scary. There were alternatives. It’s called citation and fining. It’s not swinging in the middle of the night and then demanding that the dogs be turned over.
3. Her area is in Philadelphia but in a relatively underdeveloped part of the city. As we all know, cities often expand beyond their borders. In most states it’s not very hard for cities do so. In West Virgina, where I live, it is extremely hard for cities to annex other cities or former farmland, for counties to merge, and for local governments of any sort to have much authority. However, her part of Philadelphia could reasonably be thought of as good beagling country, although I’m sure it’s nothing like the beagling grounds that lie just beyond my back door.
4. I’m glad the hunt people are coming to her defense.
5. But if I were her, I’d move.
6. This is probably going to be on Animal Planet within the next 18 months. The newest Animal Police series involves the PSPCA in Philadelphia.
I don’t know her address, so I can’t look it up, but there are areas in MOST cities where the lots are a reasonable acre or two- plenty of space to keep a small pack (and 23 IS a small pack, especially when more than a few were temporary residents) without annoying the neighbors.
In Philly?
I don’t know. But I know there are in lots of other cities.
The most recent newspaper release is complaining about filth and veterinary neglect. I’m waiting for more details, at this point.
Cities will also sometimes annex abutting rural and undeveloped land. And no, as a property owner you do not always have a say in it.
20, 10 or even just 1 year ago, this lady may have been in the county, not the city.
In Sacramento California, the county and city merged. The entire county IS the city, even farms and undeveloped land.
Don’t know this situation, but I would not be surprised if Philly had larger plots and less developed areas around it’s edges.
Oh, maybe I didn’t make it clear in that post, but check out my comments on Querencia and Smart Dogs:
1. http://stephenbodio.blogspot.com/2009/08/another-ar-outrage.html (The Jack-booted bit was that the dogs were taken, and that they were taken at night.)
2. http://smartdogs.wordpress.com/2009/08/06/they-came-for-the-bassets/
We have issues with small cities taking up “unincorporated” communites in West Virginia, and then imposed urban zoning laws on them.
I understand this.
However, she was breaking the law, and it’s her responsibility to get under code.
In West Virginia, there is a big fight over this. Kanawha County, where Charleston is, has a major vote on what’s called metro-merger government coming up. Little cities and towns outside of Charleston could become part of the “big city.”
Just like that.
Here’s the thing, even if she were knowingly breaking the law, even if it was not a great situation…
What the hell happened to citing someone, or giving them time to remove the dogs or apply for a variance? Had she even been contacted/warned/cited previously?
Or did they just swoop in and confiscate dogs in a night time raid? ‘Cause that is what it sounds like. If the goal is to get compliance with local laws and make certain the dogs were receiving proper care etc… this was colossal overkill but seems to be the way things are heading. As in “we need custody of these dogs so they can be neutered and spayed pronto!, Don’t give the evil greedy breeder a chance to send them away”
I personally am NOT OK with night raids for the heinous crime of having too many dogs. Maybe actual photos or footage of the dogs really living in truly filthy conditions with open sores etc… will be released. But “filth” and “dirty” and “skin problems” seem to be in the eye of he or she who writes up the report in some of these cases…..
Yesbiscuit has a great post on this today.
I’m with you on this– you just can’t tell from my post!
I’m with you on this.
I do believe she was in the wrong, but so were the authorities.
I think that living in the land o’fruits and nuts in California, I have had to accept that many people with dogs, if they try to do the right thing and obtain kennel permits etc… could lose their dogs and henceforth be on the radar of some pretty draconian local governments. I’m lucky as hell as my county is one of only a handful without severe limit laws. But in many cities and counties here, the limit, no matter the size of the property might be two domestic pets total.
Right now, what does one living here do? If you want to get a kennel permit or pack permit, you might spend several thousand dollars getting a variance or change of use permit even if you live on a good sized piece of land. Then you are on the radar of any animal rights radical or supporter who infiltrates the local animal services. And if mandatory spay neuter type laws pass here, you could lose your dogs and decades of careful breeding for the most trivial reason.
California counties and cities, if they would pass reasonable, objective animal ordinances for hobbyists and people who wished to keep multiple working, show, hunting dogs, could be raking in a lot more money in fees and licensing. There is so little trust of government here when it comes to pets that many many people have dropped out of the system already. Pit and rottie owners who fear BSL, small scale breeders who fear MSN, and just average decent pet owners who are one cat or dog over the 2 dog city or county limit. Not to mention the folks who can’t afford the 150.00 intact license every year and who have been quoted 300.00-500.00 for a spay.
However, common sense is a decidedly un-common thing here at this time! XD
Since the Basset owner’s address is published on the web, I plugged it into Mapquest after reading your post. Although I can’t draw any definitive conclusions from Mapquest, it does appear to me from the map provided that the area is not at all like what we envision when we hear “Philadelphia”. It may well be suitable for keeping a group of dogs.
It probably got absorbed into Philadelphia.
I must say that I am with you on this one. Total over-reaction by the authorities. And I hope that it’s not the policy of the county and city to keep people under code using these methods.
One phone call is usually all it takes to get the ball rolling for this sort of injustice. I’ve had these phone call complaints made against me from breeders in California and breeders in PA who don’t know me or see how we do things here at my Kennel. They live no where near us yet seem to think they know what we’re are doing and that we are harming our dogs.
Fortunately the dog warden knows us and knows how we do things…. legally and without a doubt better than the kennels complaining about us. We comply fully with what is asked of us, we exceed the expectations put in place to provide for our pack and we have half of what the allowable number of dogs is for our area. We constantly communicate with our close neighbors and never allow our dogs to roam or go outside as a pack without supervision.
Unfortunately, when you are doing something that others don’t feel is right in their minds, you have to deal with the phone calls in the middle of the night, the threatening e-mails everyday and the occasional attempts to have the law confiscate your dogs. Fortunately in PA you can own a gun, and fortunately on our property there are several dozen surveillance cameras. That way we know who we’re taking aim at.
Once a breeder from California said they would come and take our dog. That they would send someone to come and claim it and bring it back to California. Well since we love our neighbors and they love us. We calmly said with the blessing of our entire neighborhood “bring an army because we’ll have one waiting for you when you get here”.
In the case of these Basset hounds, its likely that whomever complained also knew someone within the PASPCA. It all snowballed from there.
My guess is that it was some anti-hunter.
I will say that bassets and all scent hounds make noises that can be a bit of nuisance.
But I’m sure that these people who complain about hounds would die if they had to live in West Virginia.
I know of a person who has 25 redbones on his property, and yes, they do make a lot of noise. He lives two miles from his nearest neighbor. But the rules are basically this, if you didn’t want to hear hounds baying or the guns cracking, you shouldn’t have moved to West Virginia. That’s what our magistrate’s policy is on this manner.
A lot of these people hate the idea of hunting hounds. However, what they don’t realize is that these dogs exist for the hunt. When otter hunting was banned in Britain, the otterhound population dropped dramatically. It was nearly saved when it was decided that introduced American mink were an environmental concern, but then they banned pack hunting.
Hunting English bassets of any sort are very rare, and I can tell you that there is a major difference between hunting bassets and show bassets. The show bassets get worn out really easily when on the hunt. They just aren’t built for it.
BTW, because you’re in PA, what are the laws on local government and city and county merger?
Not Sure about The Philly area and the outer limits. But in the stix where I live…..the limit per home is 25 dogs. Possibly set as a limit for the exact same situation this woman had with hunting hounds that live and work as a pack. There are a LOT OF HUNTERS in my area. And Retrievers and hounds are a commodity for a reason. I am not a hunter, but the majority of my clients are.
That creature limit is per year. So if 25 dogs have been on the premises under my care, including pups then each year you cannot exceed the 25 limit or you need to move into a zoned area for an operational Kennel. Or own another home.
I prefer the 25 dog limit because you are forced to be aware of the amount of pups whelped and not prone to breed for greed or overbreed. One or two litters a year and a close knit and personal relationship with the clientele.
You know what the limit is in WV?
As many as you can feed.
That is so far in the stix its called NARNIA by my children.
I certainly wouldn’t mind more dogs. But, we’ll wait until the opportunity to buy a few more homes right next door to us presents itself and the kids are old enough to continue the Legacy we started. With 5 kids. We plan to be around for a long time marching to the beat of our drum.
Got that all you FCR fanciers out there?
No.
If I showed someone one, they’d think it was either 1. black golden retriever; 2. English shepherd; or 3. Lab and golden crossed.
I need to update this post.
NYM has updates today. Apparently her property is a 320 acre nature preserve. It makes less and less sense that she was pressured to give them up immediately…
I’m amazed that place like that exists in Philadelphia County.
I bet that property is worth $$$$.