Bay Area Boxer Rescue closed...

[walternet]

I was upset and saddened to see the main page of boxer-rescue.org (Bay Area Boxer Rescue).

It cited that to a large degree it closed due to something referred to as "limit laws." Can anyone explain what this law is? I am assuming it has something to do with how many pets a city/county will allow in a location and still be considered safe/healthy...etc.

My room mate and I have rescued two Boxers from there and they are just the sweetest dogs. It is sad to see a good service like that go away.

I was also concerned about the claim that its closing was in part due to another boxer rescue making complaints.

I am wondering if anyone had any bad experiences with them and/or know what the complaints are. I am curious because if the complaints are health based my room mate and I want to make sure our two sweet girls get checked out.

I would like to say the experience we have had with BABR has been positive for us.

 

[magoo's_mama]

We adopted our dog from BABR and I do not know what the complaints made against them have been. Nor Cal Boxer rescue however is a very reputable rescue group and I doubt that they would have made complaints that were un-founded.
I have a few complaints of my own but they're not based on the health of my pup. In the future I would choose to support NorCal.
However I do not support limit laws at all. If this is why they have been shut down that is very unfortunate.

 

[LLANGE1852]

NCBR's Response to BABR being shut down

The county of Santa Clara recently terminated bay area boxer rescue (BABR)
operations. BABR, on its website, asserts the NCBR complained to Santa Clara
about BABR and thereby contributed to BABR's closure. This assertion is a
falsity. NCBR has not been involved in any fashion, including complaining,
in the recent events culminating in Santa Clara's terminating BABR
operations. In fact, NCBR welcomes other boxer rescue groups. NCBR does not have enough foster homes to save all of the boxers in need of rescue in
Northern California accordingly; NCBR supports any boxer rescue group that
can rescue boxers and humanely treat/place those boxers. NCBR is at a loss
as to why BABR would make these accusations.

NCBR Board of Directors,
Karen Heald, Amy Northrup and Laurie Stapel

 

[BABR]

BABR's current position statement

Let me first introduce myself, my name is Michelle. I have been working with BABR for a year or so. My primary involvement is public relations, since I am a retired Neonatal Nurse thus I have learned to perfect my bedside manners.

Second, BABR is currently seeking rental property in the Incorporated area of San Jose, County of San Benito, County of Stanislaus and San Juan Bautista until the end of the year. Beginning of next year we have already made tenative arrangements for a facility pending approval of permits. Anyone who has property for rent, please contact us, we're in the market.

That being said, BABR has in fact "temporarily" stopped taking in boxers. It is fact "Santa Clara Dept. of Animal Control" misused and abused government powers in efforts to obtain personal information of those volunteering by way of intimidation. When they failed to get what they wanted, they turned to threats of arresting anyone who might be a volunteer or get in their way.

It is fact this comes from "NO" complaint via the community directly affected, one's neighbors. It is fact the only grounds of which the Dept of Animal Control made such threats, were based on County Ordinance limiting the number of pets. Even thou there is a standing court ruling from 1999 where outlined are exceptions allowing for the purpose of rescue, up to 8 additional dogs over the current limit for the purpose of adoption. In addition, accompaning this order, letter dated 8/2001 from the District Attorney's office clearly outlining Animal Control Officers/Dept authorities. One of which is to refrain from contact unless a complaint of which can be validated was made by way of a neighbor. Further states, Dept of Animal Control does "not" have any police powers and can not arrest, initiate search/seizure nor confiscate any "personal property". Yet they did it anyway......

It is also by way of one's own emails and other documents, member(s) of NCBR have made it their mission to destroy not only one of BABR's "core" founders personally but also as an organization. One of which comes to mind so clear for I wondered, "how in the world could one honestly make such defamatory statements and live in another state" has completely dumb-founded me.

That being said, it was and has never been the intention of BABR to publicly annouce the "dirt" behind the scenes and has been removed. We will continue to update our site with the latest developments.

Sincerely,
Michelle Langenberg