@dagodingo - Note that if flying, most airlines have age limits and when I fly American (in cabin) age must be 10wks.
Brat Rescue and Transport; How they really treat rescues
-
This post is deleted! -
This post is deleted! -
This post is deleted! -
Yet, I am the one attacking? I don’t know what your problem with BRAT is but evidently you have one.<<
Yet, I am the one attacking? I don’t know what your problem with BRAT is but evidently you have one.Your responses were unhinged, unrelated to what was being addressed an truly unworthy of more of a comment than this.
I was addressing your attack of a member. Period. Whatever her mistakes, you turned it into abusive personal name calling.
Yes, I have documented issues with Brat. None of which need airing here. None of which have anything to do with this thread other than acknowledging others also have issues, but it doesn't help the dog to address those thing when the dog is and should be the only issue. Your pretense of knowing everything on both sides neither helps nor impresses... nor excuses your personal abuse.
-
This post is deleted! -
Unless you can prove she lied or defamed BRAT, you are doing the same to her.
And yes, a moderator to remove your repeated personal attacks that are against forum rules. -
This post is deleted! -
Heather, when you or any client refuses to follow any professional's advice, they would be irresponsible and total idiots to continue to be listed as your doctor/vet/pharmacists/ dentists, whatever. Period. It is very telling that no vet will treat him if he is in your care. It says you have blown off all of their advice or gained such a reputation they won't risk it. You have managed to put the dog into an unsafe position of having no veterinarian. It doesn't matter if you are right about the meds if you lose the dog and he is euthanized. You are old enough to know it is necessary to convince a professional of your view. My vets have always met me at least halfway even when they disagreed because I went to them with solid research and specialists in the field willing to discuss the case with them. Add to this, BRAT owns the dog, not you. The vets have to answer to the legal owners.
You locked in on sawdust and one brand. They said you could find an equitable brand. There is no research or medical proof that a dog needs freshly cooked meat.
Your posts can still be seen by the moderators, and the police can demand copies if this issue escalates to a legal challenge.
You have yourself and the dog backed into a corner. Adopt him, or offer to hold him while they euthanize him if you are really sure that is their intent. That they are pushing for intervention is a clear sign that you are about to lose any options. The police and animal control can appear at your door and simply take the dog. If you care about this dog, you need to be sure what you need to do to save him. You are not going to find that through venting on this board.
-
@dagodingo Just stop. She didn't say it was ONLY sawdust. And it is you who continue to make all-knowing claims. You have no better insight into Brat's intentions than anyone unless you sit on the board or tap their lines. And that isn't helping the dog for you to keep attacking her personally or defending Brat. It's about the dog. Not you puffing up about how you are reporting her, hope they get the dog, hope she's sued etc. Just focus on the dog.
I care for basenjis. I don't equate being for or against or totally unconcerned with BRAT to be a test for loving the breed. Again, you want to keep on puffing up your defense of Brat. Focus on the dog.
As for her posts, I have addressed her posts.. without calling her names or being abusive. Maybe that's why you missed them. -
@debradownsouth She said it was sawdust, please go ahead and show me that RC satiety is sawdust? Link me to where it states RC satiety is sawdust as the statement says?
The more you continue to defend the indefensible, the more I lose respect.
You are equally implying that you know BRATs intentions and the facts here more than I do. It is you “puffing”yourself up and insulting me.
Damn right I am focusing on the dog, you go right ahead and tell me it’s better to leave the dog where he is with no medical care.
-
@dagodingo said in Brat Rescue and Transport; How they really treat rescues:
@debradownsouth She said it was sawdust, please go ahead and show me that RC satiety is sawdust? Link me to where it states RC satiety is sawdust as the statement says?
Go read their ingredients and research. Beyond bored with your obsession.
The more you continue to defend the indefensible, the more I lose respect.
No idea what "indefensible" you are accusing me of defending. But I'm pretty sure you know how deeply I care about your level of respect. I do care how you keep going off topic with personal attacks so I'm going to simply stop responding to your broken record.
You are equally implying that you know BRATs intentions and the facts here more than I do. It is you “puffing”yourself up and insulting me.
Speaking of lies.... there is one. I said NO ONE knows their intention who isn't on the board or wiretapping. Since I do either, that puts me in the "no one knows their intentions." Surprised you are so frothing you tried to twist that.
Damn right I am focusing on the dog, you go right ahead and tell me it’s better to leave the dog where he is with no medical care.
See above. You're making things up. I didn't say that either. -
@debradownsouth You continue to attack me, and defend someone who admits to abusing a basenji.
Many times I have seen you do the same to others and stayed out of it, not in future. YOU are the one attacking people on here.
I replied to the OP and YOU were the one to then accuse me of attacking and interject yourself on your high horse as the arbiter of forum decorum and rules.
-
@debradownsouth Here is the ingredients list, show me where it says sawdust?
Btw, the statement “is sawdust” implies that it “is sawdust”. It’s like saying Coke is water. It contains water but is not water. To state Coke “is water” is incorrect. Further, the threshold for defamation lawsuits hinges on actual malice. As such, the statement “they want me to feed Declan sawdust, would you feed your dog sawdust” given in the derogatory context (along with her statement that RC is “crap”), would clearly be defamation.
So having cleared that up, what would you like me to point out next?
-
@debradownsouth “Damn right I am focusing on the dog, you go right ahead and tell me it’s better to leave the dog where he is with no medical care.”
“See above. You're making things up. I didn't say that either.”
See above, I didn’t say you did, I said “go ahead and tell me”
Reading comprehension problem?
-
“I could spend time pointing out the person most closely walking the libel line, and it wasn't her.. but why bother?”
Yet you did bother and implied that I am the one walking the libel line, btw it’s defamation not libel.
“Your attack accomplished nothing.”
Where you interjected yourself and attacked me for stating the truth.
“You may want to take your lack of serious rescue workings”
Evidently you know me well and can qualify this statement? I have a “lack” of serious rescue workings.
“and get more info before you attack someone so stupidly.”
I need more info and am stupid, unlike you. No insults there is there?
“YES, rescues find homes for dogs they cannot adopt, agree to pay for care/food indefinitely.”
No doubt they do, kindly show me where BRaT agreed to that in the adoption contract? Otherwise, to use your own insult, you are acting stupidly.
“Without you having some telepathic knowledge, a copy of their contract and conversations, you are in no position to attack another member as you have.”
Neither are you, difference is that you obviously don’t and didn’t take the time to enquire, stupidly.
“ You went far from acceptable forum discussion of the issues into vile abuse of the poster.”
Really, so stating the truth is vile and abusive now.
“With no proof, just your rancid views.The OP is concerned that the things BRAT is demanding is potentially deadly and certainly far from simple NORMAL treatment. From 3 months to no repeating is fairly extreme and certainly worthy of her concern.”
What is potentially deadly is increasing a dogs dosage WITHOUT your veterinarians knowledge or approval, then denying the dog treatment. As you O high one are evidently a qualified lawyer, veterinarian and pharmacist, you must know better than the rest of us “stupid” people.
“Her move into an emotional tirade at least is in defence of the dog's health. What, other than getting off on berating a member in pain, are your excuses?”
Again, I am concerned with the safety, health and well-being of the dog. Not interested in your drama, no doubt you are also her psychiatrist and thus can qualify your statement.
“ Elbrant managed to address issues, albeit harshly at times, “
Another member you insult. You do it all the time, perhaps you haven’t noticed?
“without calling the op disgusting, immoral, unethical, etc.”
The truth is an absolute defense.
“Btw, your laughable continued braying about sawdust... they'd have to sue about 20 companies and sites that point out the same thing... cellulose in dog food is often sawdust.”
Still waiting for you to qualify the statement given. But then I addressed this already
“Do I think, if facts are presented accurately, that BRAT has acted in the best interest of the dog?
Correct, “IF”
“I am not surprised they've washed their hands.”
Except, they haven’t. They called animal control and are still trying to help the dog.
“I won't be surprised if they euthanize the dog promptly if they don't find a home able to pay his bills to treat him right or willing to go with minimal care. Did her bringing the issue to the forum instead of privately help push them to a final decision? I don't know.”
If you don’t know, (and it appears you don’t know much about this, except how to attack and insult forum members), then why comment?
“But I do know waging personal attacks on someone who is seriously in pain and panic helped no one except maybe your ego.”
Save me the drama, you have attacked and insulted me repeatedly.
“Now we have a dog who may end up euthanized or undertreated. That should have been the only focus from the start... how to help the dog. “
It was from the start, before you decided that you are the forum God and lectured us all on what you decided we must do, along with attacking and insulting me.
“ I was addressing your attack of a member. Period. Whatever her mistakes, you turned it into abusive personal name calling.”
Wrong, you decided to attack me, insult me and berate me for correctly stating what is going on. Newsflash, you are not God, nor are you the forum moderator. All in defense of someone who is endangering the life of a basenji. Be proud.
“Unless you can prove she lied or defamed BRAT, you are doing the same to her.”
She lied, she stated that BRaT told her to feed Declan sawdust. Clearly a lie.
She lied when she said Declan is a service dog, then changed it to a companion dog. (Big difference before you argue they are the same).
Let’s all ignore the facts to satisfy your fragile ego.-
The dog has been overdosed more than once and without consultation / approval by her own admission. This is way beyond BRaT, is illegal and is considered drug abuse.
-
She has been refused treatment by at least one veterinarian. That alone is shocking, I have never been refused in 20+ years.
-
She claims the dog has serious biting issues and insecurity / anxiety. Yet her job as a foster is to work on those issues and help the dog find a forever home. After four...no wait, six....no wait, eight years, I believe she has been given a fair chance. That’s why it’s called “fostering”.
-
She has published on a public forum, private information and emails, selectively edited to continue her defamation and smear campaign.
-
She has continually insulted several members and continues to do so even when they do not reply. Hardly surprising from someone who cowardly posts lies on a forum that BRaT are not a member of. (Yes I know there are some members on here but they are not the board). In an attempt to blackmail them into what she wants.
I could go on, line by line. I think you get the point. Defend her all you want, just shows your true colors.
“And yes, a moderator to remove your repeated personal attacks that are against forum rules.”
Yes, a moderator should delete this whole defamatory thread. Along with your attacks and insults.
-
-
To clear up one point, Royal Canin Satiety Support ingredients "Powdered cellulose, chicken by-product meal, corn, wheat gluten, wheat, corn gluten meal, natural flavors, dried plain beet pulp, chicken fat, fish oil, pea fiber, potassium chloride, calcium carbonate, vegetable oil, psyllium seed husk, choline chloride, fructooligosaccharides, sodium tripolyphosphate, L-lysine, vitamins [DL-alpha tocopherol acetate (source of vitamin E), L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (source of vitamin C), niacin supplement, biotin, riboflavin supplement, D-calcium pantothenate, thiamine mononitrate (vitamin B1), pyridoxine hydrochloride (vitamin B6), vitamin A acetate, vitamin B12 supplement, folic acid, vitamin D3 supplement], glucosamine hydrochloride, taurine, salt, DL-methionine, magnesium oxide, marigold extract (Tagetes erecta L.), trace minerals [zinc proteinate, zinc oxide, ferrous sulfate, manganese proteinate, manganous oxide, copper sulfate, calcium iodate, copper proteinate, sodium selenite], L-carnitine, chondroitin sulfate, rosemary extract, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid.
Whether their powdered cellulose is actually derived from wood or not, it is a kissing cousin. Sawdust might be an unflattering description, but it's likely pretty accurate. There has been an ongoing flap about its use in grated parmesan, for one example. Personally I would not feed Royal Canin to my pet, but then most over processed dog foods have something objectionable in them, not to mention the processing in itself, which I find questionable. Also, many of these foods are under the MARS label, including Royal Canin, Cesar, Pedigree, etc.
-
@eeeefarm I do get that and don’t disagree with your opinion. The statement “Royal Canin Satiety is sawdust” is a lie and not accurate. Nor is the statement “BRaT wanted me to feed my dog sawdust” correct, again a lie and qualified by the self admitted fact that they were open to other alternatives. I was asked for one provable lie, per the post “Unless you can prove she lied or defamed BRAT, you are doing the same to her.”
Many things come from other origins, plastics and gasoline from refining oil. Yet to say plastic or gasoline is oil is a provable lie.
A real simple way to prove the point here, take two dogs and feed one the Royal Canin, feed the other sawdust for six months. Would you do that? No, obviously because Royal Canin is not sawdust.
Aside from the fact that she claims it cost $150 a month for food. Sure, I donate to BRaT to help basenjis less fortunate than my own, so that they can spend two or three times more on their dog food. With the caveat of a dog that actually does need a special diet as per a qualified veterinarian.
-
@dagodingo said in Brat Rescue and Transport; How they really treat rescues:
. With the caveat of a dog that actually does need a special diet as per a qualified veterinarian.
I have a huge problem with veterinarians prescribing a food that they sell and make money on. It's called conflict of interest. No, Royal Canin is not exclusively "sawdust" or cellulose, so your comparison isn't really valid. Obviously nobody would opt to feed their dog an exclusive sawdust diet. And a little bit of "poetic license" for effect is pretty common on line. Not something to get your knickers in a twist over, IMO. This whole thread has gotten seriously overheated, and only one poster has a truly emotional reason to exaggerate, so maybe cut her some slack?
-
"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." Sir Isaac Newton
@westcoastflea1 said in Brat Rescue and Transport; How they really treat rescues:
Who does this?
You did this, Heather. The choices you made set this in motion.
BRAT explained that you could adopt Declan by signing a piece of paper. You refused? Why would you refuse? Declan would have been yours. Your dog. And the only thing you would have needed was a few extra dollars every month. $15-20 for food, and $25/month put to the side for his annual checkup and shots. Easy enough. Not the end of the world. Sounds "do-able", right?
But you refused to sign a piece of paper.... what did you expect to happen? Did you think BRAT would just "go away" and forget about it all? Now your upset that Animal Control is coming to pick the dog up?
@westcoastflea1 said in Brat Rescue and Transport; How they really treat rescues:
Brat wanted Animal Control to come and they hoped I was stupid enough to let Animal Control on my property, examine Declan, and take him to the vet,
BRAT has requested that Animal Control pick Declan up to be seen by a Vet. At which point, a BRAT representative will probably come to pick Declan up. You should not expect Declan to return to your home.
If Declan is this viscious animal that attacks everyone, he "might" be put down. If Declan is well behaved, he "might" just go to another foster home to be assessed. The determining factor will probably rely on whether the Vet says he is or isn't managable.
Your quote from the email you received, stating that, "she has frantically called all vets and no one would see Declan if he was still with me" indicates that the Vets are willing to treat Declan.
@debradownsouth is right. The authorities can appear at your door and just take the dog. You need to understand: they can arrest you if you try to resist them. Be very careful, Heather. Please.
@westcoastflea1 said in Brat Rescue and Transport; How they really treat rescues:
you don't take a dog abused as puppy and make it all magically vanish,
Declan was put in your care 8(?) years ago... So, why haven't you resolved these issues? Is he still a territorial biter who is is anxious, insecure, and doesn't want to be touched? After being in your home and care for eight years? Eight years and this viscious dog provides so much "emotional support" for you that you call him your ESA and desparately want to keep him?
These two concepts are conflicted. An ESA dog that isn't adoptable? You are painting pictures of two different dogs. One that might not be adoptable, and one that is. So which is it?
Declan is either a loving support dog, or
Declan bites anyone who tries to touch him, doesn't want you on "his" couch, and displays anxious and insecure behaviors.Harsh as it might seem... none of this really adds up and it suggests that you are running some sort of scam.
Are you lying about Declan being "unadoptable" so that you can keep him while BRAT pays for his care?
Is he really that sick with all these medical issues?
Between the $350/mont in meds and $150/month for food... is that just an extra $500/month in your pocket? -
“and only one poster has a truly emotional reason to exaggerate, so maybe cut her some slack?”
I will NEVER cut any slack for people who abuse animals period.
Yes, vets do sometimes have a conflict of interest. A good vet weighs the benefits of the food versus the risks. For a dog that is very obese and very hungry, feeding something that contains a filler like cellulose is considered appropriate.
I fed my dog with high liver enzymes Royal Canin, before that I tried Dr Dodd’s liver detox and it sent her enzymes up. They came back down a little on the Royal Canin liver diet. Do I feed my healthy dog Royal Canin now? No because I believe I have better quality foods that I trust more.
