A dog’s life is valuable regardless of whether he is homeless OR a well loved pet!

RAW was provided with information, documents, and undercover video of a “rescue” operating out of Cabool Missouri that needs to be exposed.  This is no ordinary rescue. Diana’s Grove has an interesting story filled with twists and turns that would make even the strongest “adopt don’t shop” philosopher take a moment to pause.

First, some background information about Diana’s Grove and the owner/head honcho of this group. A link to Diana’s Grove shows a website that is not even animal related, but rather describes a “17 year mystery school experience”….whatever the heck that is!!! The site is filled with words that don’t really “say” anything to describe what it exactly is. It mentions “priestess, earth-based spirituality,” and offers classes for something, but what the classes are, we can’t say because the site doesn’t really explain (unless RAW just isn’t spiritual enough to understand).  So what does this have to do with rescue?  Well, we aren’t sure if this is a scam rescue or not, but something isn’t right based upon the information that has been provided to us so let’s break it down and you can be the judge.

The undercover video shows the conditions in which these hundreds of poor dogs and dozens of litters of puppies are kept: overcrowded, fights breaking out, housed outdoors 24/7 in bitter Missouri winters and stifling summers with little to no protection from the extreme weather. Hundreds of dogs and litter after litter of puppies being born, raised, and kept in subpar conditions with little to no veterinarian care, barely able to move in their crates, potential human adopters exposed to contagious diseases at adoption events, all as reported by the inspection reports and shown in video.

The “rescue” known as Diana’s Grove was doing adoptions out of Petco and Petsmart until these companies got wind of the issues and ended their relationship with the rescue. The rescue’s solution to their problems? They issued a press release on January 12 stating that they had secured a lease for 6600 square foot of retail space within an indoor shopping mall known as the Chesterfield Mall and were going RETAIL rescue of course! Fortunately, the mall owners were provided with information that made them think twice about their decision to lease space to this group and just recently terminated the lease before they officially opened.

So what is this “rescue” doing wrong? Well if you see rescue as a “do no evil” type of entity, then you will make excuses for this rescue and its behavior. If you are pro-animal welfare, then you will understand what is wrong with this situation. NO dog deserves to be cared for in subpar conditions simply because he is homeless. ALL dogs, regardless of whether they are purpose bred dogs owned by breeders, pet owners, etc. should be cared for in a manner that is consistent for his wellbeing.There should be NO DOUBLE STANDARDS….NO EXEMPTION FROM REGULATIONS! A dog’s life is valuable regardless of whether he is homeless OR a well loved pet.No dog should be kept in a place where he is not provided with adequate and safe housing. Rescues/shelters should not allow dog fights to occur due to housing issues, allow overcrowding, be exempt from providing prompt and appropriate medical attention by a licensed veterinarian for injury or illness, and should never be allowed to have more animals than can be properly cared for and maintained.

So what EXACTLY did this rescue do that is so bad? For that answer you need to see both the video footage link HERE so you can see with your own eyes the conditions in which dozens and dozens of dogs are kept, along with the inspection reports showing the serious deficits as noted by inspectors. Items include outdoor, overcrowded pens with broken latches, rust, tarps that are torn and flapping without being tied down, metal roof panels strewn about, overcrowded pens showing dogs fighting, sad dogs kept in rusted, stacked, undersized crates stored in a garage, litter after litter of puppies.

This situation is fluid and there is not yet an end to this story, nor is there yet a happy ending for the dogs currently in this “rescue” but RAW will continue to bring any information that it receives regarding this situation and encourages YOU to do your own research on this group and any others that need to be exposed for violating animal welfare conditions. In the meantime, here is what we have so far:

Here is a Facebook post bragging about a weekend adoption event that Diana’s Grove claims brought about the adoptions of not less than “94 dogs and puppies”.  Now, that is a LOT of adoptions in a single weekend, so let’s take a closer look at this rescue.  According to their own information, this rescue typically charges $275-400 per adoption…if we average this out to the median fee of $325 per adoption, that equals out to over $30,000 dollars made in a single adoption weekend!!! THAT is a lot of money.  Now for those of you that are going to say that it isn’t considering the amount that a typical rescue puts INTO their animals for vet care etc., perhaps you need to look closer at this particular rescue’s background to see if they truly DO have the animal’s best interest at heart.

 

 

This rescue set up a GoFundMe page on December 14th  2016 that has so far raised more than $9,000.00.  They openly admit that they have a paid staff, although they DON’T disclose the dollar amount of salaries and who benefits from those salaries.

What is MORE interesting is the fact that on December 20th, 2016 according to a news report:

Diana’s Grove rescue relinquished more than one hundred dogs, 165 to be exact according to records, to the local Humane Society due to what the rescue group described as a “financial strain”….hmmm, that’s interesting.  What makes it MORE interesting is the fact that the Humane Society is quoted as saying that they will be giving all of the dogs “vaccines, flea, tick and heartworm prevention medicines as well as dental work, ear cleaning and nail trimming”.  In addition, some dogs “were being treated for injuries from other dogs and illnesses”.  Does this sound like Diana’s Grove Rescue was spending money to care for these dogs other than the most basic requirements of sustenance such as food and water? Link to Source

And there is more. RAW was provided with inspection reports you can see HERE of the rescue location where the dogs are housed and it shows a LOT of dogs, dogs are kept EVERYWHERE, in fact, according to a single inspection report, there were HUNDREDS OF DOGS on site, including ONE HUNDRED PUPPIES, seven litters of puppies to be exact, all under the age of 8 weeks.  The inspection reports clearly show serious deficits affecting the quality of life and care for these dogs and a long history of questionable and SERIOUS violations of law.  Below is just a PARTIAL list of the most egregious violations.  Of special note is the September 2015 inspection that shows that two Puggle puppies previously diagnosed with contagious mange and still under treatment were brought to an adoption event and presented to the public!

In addition, Cynthea Jones of Diana’s Grove Dog Rescue received an “official letter of warning” by the State of Missouri found HERE due to repeat violations of the Animal Care Facilities Act and applicable regulations and STILL continued to down the road of repeated poor animal care practices as shown in the subsequent inspection reports.

July 28th, 2014

***Inventory for this inspection shows 178 adult dogs and 98 puppies on premises

  1. “the licensee had 276 animals in her facility”
  2. “due to the large number of animals, many of the primary enclosures did not have enough dog houses for the number of animals housed”
  3. “a Dog De Bordeaux in a primary enclosure did not have enough space to assume a normal standing and sitting position”.
  4. “A mixed breed dog and her three puppies were noted to have varying degrees of hair loss. Licensee stated that the dogs had received treatment for demodectic mange and ringworm (but) licensee was unable to produce a medical record regarding date of diagnosis or treatments”.

October 28th, 2014

***Inventory for this date shows 69 puppies and 164 adult dogs on premises

  1. “At least six primary enclosures were not provided with enough shelter structures for the animals housed”.
  2. “a male Basset Hound was noted to have thin body condition and labored breathing”

February 2nd, 2015

***Inventory shows 190 adult dogs and 48 puppies on premises!

  1. “the ambient temperature at todays inspection was 17 degrees…approximately 20 dogs were observed to have little or no bedding”
  2. “”several enclosures housing 1 or 2 dogs where the animals were not able to stand, sit, or lay in a normal manner”

June 9th, 2015

***Inventory shows 173 adult dogs and 104 puppies on premises!

  1. “a male tri-colored Beagle located in the puppy building was not provided with 6 inches of head space” to move around his enclosure.
  2. “several animals…were noted to have various symptoms” of illness.
  3. “an adult black Labrador was able to place its head completely through….a large bent or missing chain link door, posing a potential risk of injury”
  4. “shade tarp…. broken and sagging”
  5. “Multiple dog houses and buckets throughout the facility displayed significant signs of chewing and wear”
  6. “Plastic siding had been chewed and torn from the wall”
  7. “Multiple enclosures were not equipped with enough dog houses for all of the occupants in the enclosures”
  8. dog “houses provided were small in comparison to the size of the dog in the enclosure”
  9. “primary enclosures displayed rusted surfaces”
  10. “multiple enclosures were sided with corrugated metal had rusted and broken off, creating jagged edges and points, posed a risk to the animals in the enclosures”.

September 26th, 2015

This was an adoption event inspection offsite of the rescue premises, showing 50 adult dogs and 13 puppies

  1. “two Puggle puppies were observed to have hair loss on both ears. Upon further review of the medical records, these puppies were diagnosed with sarcoptic mange on 9/15/15 and were to be treated with Ivermectin for two weeks (until 9/29/15). These puppies were available for today’s adoption event”.
  2. “there were several dogs observed in todays transport that were unable to posture normally within their enclosure”. “Licensee must ensure that all animals placed in transport has the ability to posture in a normal manner”.

November 4th, 2015

***Inventory shows 207 adult dogs, 77 puppies, 6 adult cats, 10 kittens on premises!!!!

  1. “7 litters of puppies ages ranging from less than one week to eight weeks of age” were housed outside and “not provided with adequate bedding or additional heat sources”
  2. “majority of the outdoor enclosures were not provided with aggregate material and the dogs were on bare dirt”
  3. “two adult Beagles with 9 nursing puppies” supposedly came from Arkansas but the rescue was unable to provide any health certificates or proof of rabies vaccination.
  4. A Pitbull (Ellie) housed with her ten nursing puppies “was noted to have open wounds on her mammary glands…no record of treatment for the dog’s condition was available”. “Licensee shall consult a licensed veterinarian”.
  5. Outdoor enclosure areas “not structurally sound”
  6. “A Cairn Terrier….was noted to have a bilateral greenish ocular discharge” with no diagnosis or treatment documentation by a licensed veterinarian.
  7. “dog doors were no longer operational. The springs on the door were not working and the doors were stuck in the open position” which prevented “temperature control in the building to protect the dogs from the outside elements”.
  8. “a black mixed breed dog…was noted to have thin body condition and loose stool”
  9. A blue tarp was observed to be ripped and sagging into an enclosure housing two adult dogs”
  10. “multiple surfaces throughout the facility displayed significant chewing to the point that they no longer provided sufficient shelter for the dogs”
  11. “10% of the enclosures in the facility did not provide a sufficient number/size of dog houses in the enclosures for all of the occupants”
  12. “The majority of dog houses in the outdoor enclosures were not situated to ultilize the wind and rain breaks”
  13. Multiple adult dogs and additionally six adult cats did not have a microchip or any other means of identification.
  14. “Upon review of the records, Acquisition information for multiple animals was not available”
  15. “a long haired small mixed breed dog was noted to have very thin body condition, dental disease, bleeding gums, and lethargic”

January 26th, 2016

***Inventory shows 195 adult dogs and 64 puppies on premises!

  1. “groups of puppies housed in outdoor enclosures” during a follow-up inspection, without being properly acclimated as required to be in writing by a licensed veterinarian.
  2. Dogs were “standing in puddles”
  3. The Pitbull known as Ellie had healed but the licensee “was not able to provide any documentation regarding veterinary consultation” for the dog.
  4. A small mixed breed dog known as “Fugi” did not have proof of rabies vaccination and was quarantined
  5. A Lhasa Apso had “swelling of his left muzzle with draining” and had not been examined or treated by a licensed veterinarian.
  6. A Lhasa Apso was noted to have bilateral corneal pigmentation, bilateral mucopurulent ocular discharge, and hind limb lameness”

May 23rd, 2016

***Inventory shows 176 adult dogs and 100 puppies on premises!!!

  1. Broken fencing and housing included “broken support posts on chain link gates”,
  2. “jagged edges and pose potential risks to animals in the enclosure”