"In practice, of course, AC has virtually NO desire to take these animals to the shelter, as long as the person who found them is willing to take responsibility for them"

AC may have a duty to seize an animal, and desire all depends on the individual and the circumstances, in my work as an AC officer we could never revoke property rights until very specific procedures were followed. Additionally, we never assigned rights either, but we did enforce adoption requirements and we did do health and welfare checks. Dogs that qualify for adoption also required the prospective owners to qualify for ownership which was facilitated at another shelter after the animal was transported. We did not want the public perception that we gave away the family pet to the next door neighbor.

I could leave, or recognize, the dog in the custody of an individual other than the owner which was not assigning ownership, the distinction is important because if I saw a violation I could still hold the individual who was in control of the animal responsible, but I could never violate the individual right of private property while out in the field by arbitrarily assigning new ownership. Usually if the dog did not have tags or proof that the person in care of the animal was directly associated (i.e. roommate) with the owner and a violation was observed (i.e. dog was running loose) then I would seize the animal. My duty was to protect the animal and the public and I could have been liable if the dog was hit by a car or attacked a child.

Also, most rescue groups were on the up and up, but I've had to take a few to court because they were animal hoarders. Not saying that this is common or that is what you all are about, but it is something we had to deal with.

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]