Diary Of A Hollywood Refugee

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Mutts & Moms - MORONS!!

Mutts and Moms is a non profit mixed breed dog rescue, which was started by Marina Baktis, a volunteer with Los Angeles city shelters who saw ll the beautiful animals that are euthanized daily and wanted to do something!

But two days ago, Mutts and Moms swooped in, and snatched a dog from a loving family in what can only be viewed as nothing more than egotistical and misguided actions of an organization that clearly no longer cares more about by the book policy than it does about animals and their welfare!

This has to fall under the category of STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES!!

Shame on Marina, & shame on Mutts and Moms!

From Craigslist:

Ellen DeGeneres adopted a dog from Mutts and Moms, then spent a ton of money on general training and training so the dog could get along with her cats. The dog was ultimately unable to get along with Ellen's cats, and Ellen found a great home for the dog with her hairdresser and her hairdresser's two daughters, who fell in love and bonded with the dog. Mutts and Moms said Ellen violated her contract by not returning the dog to Mutts and Moms, so they SWOOPED IN AND SNATCHED THE DOG FROM ITS FAMILY.

Why didn't they just interview the family and have them fill out paperwork right then and there so the dog could stay with the family who was caring for the dog and had fallen in love with it? Why did they snatch the dog from two girls who had bonded with the dog (and with whom the dog had bonded)? This is a case of employees "going by policy" instead of MAKING THE EFFORT to work out the best solution for all parties involved! This is not the behavior of an organization that cares about animals first and foremost! They have disrupted the dog's life and the family's life instead of working to create a harmonious solution.

Mutts and Moms MUST issue an apology for its rash and thoughtless actions and return the dog to the family it loves and who loves it!

Mutts and Moms is affiliated with Paw Boutique. Mutts and Moms does not have a listed phone number, but Paw Boutique's number is (626) 394-0946 and their email address is pawboutique@yahoo.com.

Further info:

Mutts and Moms
Paw Boutique
523 S Raymond Avenue
Pasadena, CA 91105
Email: pawboutique@yahoo.com


  • At 10:46 PM, October 16, 2007, Blogger Tom Terranova said…

    nice post!
    and you have a great blog.

    i sent marina an email.
    not that she'll read it...
    but maybe the flood of emails
    will send her a message.

    take care.

    tom :-)

  • At 7:17 AM, October 18, 2007, Blogger Rach said…

    You obviously haven't rescued one single animal during your entire 2 seconds living on this planet. Because, had you, you would be educated to the fact that there are many homes that are not suitable for different types of dogs, and also, you would know that the return rate of many animals adopted or bought is high, due to events that occur in life such as: pregnancy, getting married, moving to a place that doesn't accept pets, "boredom" of a pet after a while, and in the worst cases, simply no longer wanting to care for the animal, the list goes on and on. You should shut your fucking mouth, because you have no idea what rescuing animals entails. This isn't about wanting to "kid-nap" a dog or "snatch" it away from a "loving home" because of an "ego" -- if you think that, you obviously have your head so far shoved up your ass that you can't see straight or think logically and with education. I personally rescue animals and have worked my ass off. We know the ins and outs, and we know what the red flags when we see them.

    We rescuers know, because we have done the work. We have seen animals returned, dumped, handed from family to family. We work hard to get the animals out of the shelters, out of the streets, and into a place where it will be safe. We have policies in place to ensure the best interest of the animal, to do our best to ensure that the animal is SAFE, LIFELONG, not just temporarily.

    If you don't like that, then go adopt from a backyard breeder who does no screening whatsoever.

    You don't know, and because you don't know, don't talk.


  • At 11:50 AM, October 20, 2007, Blogger Charla said…

    I do not feel sorry for the owners of Mutts and Moms AT ALL. They should have visited the new family and found some way to work this out. I wonder if either of these two heartless women have any children? The feelings and emotions of the children involved should have been at the forefront of this situation.

    All these tearful appearances by the owners do not make me feel sorry for them at all. They are getting what they deserve. Do either of them think anyone feels sorry for them because they claim they can’t eat or sleep and one says she is having "heart palpitations"? What did these two women think would happen when the ripped the family pet away from innocent children????

    Mutts and Moms thought that they had a contract, it had been violated and they were in control. Well, I’m so happy to see that their business is destroyed as well as their reputation.

    I’m now reading that they aren’t even up to date with the Secretary of State. I hope that the full force of the State of California comes down on these two women and their questionable business practices!

  • At 8:13 AM, October 28, 2007, Blogger Huntress said…

    Response to RACH inane comment:

    First - hyperbole makes you sound like the a 12 yr old who has alot to hide.

    Second - you have no idea whether or not I've rescued animals OR whether anyone in my family rescues animals OR perhaps even breeds dogs or horses, OR whether I sit on the board of directors for any organization that rescues animals, OR whether my best friends runs an animal rescue shelter and has for well into 15 years now!

    Take the hint Rach and keep your inane remarks to yourself since you don't know anything ( to shove your own hyperbole back at you)

    Your endless prattling about the different types of dogs, home suitableness, returning dogs for this and the other reason, yada yada ramble ramble HAS NOTHING do with this situation.

    Ellen knew the family, had witnessed the way they were caring for the dog, and it was obvious to everyone involved that the dog and the family were CLEARLY suited to one another.

    What if Ellen had gone on vacation and asked the family to look after the dog rather than put it in a "doggie hotel" . What these loons have marched in, tore the dog away from a loving family that was looking after it for a couple of weeks - for NO REASON?

    The dog was not abused by this family. There were alternative actions that could have been taken beside yank this dog away from a loving caring family.

    If Marina condones the actions exhibited in this situation, then her sanity should questioned and her license temporarily suspended!

    All that these alleged "dog rescuers" had to do, was simply pay an initial visit to the home, observe the way dog and the family interacted, inspected the home in a non intrusive manner to ensure the home was clean, the dog was being fed the appropriate dog food and not scraps of leftovers, and they could have suggested that the family be allowed to keep the dog conditionally:

    that condition could have included several visits to the home over time to ensure that dog was not abused, and that the family and dog were "compatible".

    Had they spent half a day with the family observed the way they and the dog interacted, and then returned for weekly visits over the course of a month, this would have been more than appropriate action to help alleviate any "concerns' they may have genuinely harbored, rather than simply yanking him away from a loving family.

    Their egos and over inflated sense of self righteousness got in the way of their minds and their hearts.

    No one- least of all me-is questioning the general policies of animal rescuers. The policies are created and in place for damn good reason, but there are ALWAYS extenuating circumstances that warrant the use of common sense. Policies are guidelines. Not laws!!

    That these people put policy ahead of common sense in THIS situation by forcibly removing a dog from a loving home for NO GOOD REASON other than THEY didn't get to vet the family initially has made the public highly suspicious of their integrity!

    Ellen knew the family. Had she simply gone away for two weeks holiday and asked the family to take care of the dog for her, no animal rescuer would have DARED storm into their home and remove the dog UNLESS there was concrete evidence of ABUSE.

    These rescuers behaved atrociously and unethically, and the fact that their actions generated far more outrage than support, speaks to that, and also speaks to how inane YOUR remarks are.

    I have to wonder if you aren't one of the rescuers who actually took part in this ludicrous act of bad judgment wrapped in ego and stupidity, because your comments sound as stupid as their behavior

  • At 8:20 AM, October 28, 2007, Blogger Huntress said…

    Tom & Charla - thanks for dropping by and for having the common sense to appreciate how inane the actions of these "rescuers" were.

    These kind of actions are usually the tip of the iceberg. When people dig deeper they find a history of this kind of stupid behavior that serves no one - especially the animals.

    Policies are guidelines, and there are always exceptions to policies in certain situations.

    Granted I don't want to encourage people who adopt pets to suddenly hand them off to friends just because they can't remain in their homes for whatever reason.

    But once in a while, this does happen. Surely there is a contingency policy in place to dictate a better course of action than the inane one taken in this particular case.

  • At 2:40 PM, November 21, 2007, Blogger Sue Doe-Nim said…

    I've got to say that you're ridiculously off base.

    Ellen signed an agreement and then didn't keep her word.

    She's used a child to bitch and whine and stop a hard working woman from doing what she loves.

    This is obscene and you've fallen prey to a manipulative actress.

    Do not forget that she's an actress!

  • At 9:09 AM, November 22, 2007, Blogger Huntress said…

    Sue -

    I repped actors/actresses for years - so don't worry about me 'falling prey" to their performances. That comment speaks volumes about your personal views on actors than it does to the truth of this situation.

    The only person off base on two counts is you.

    Ellen did not intentionally violate anything.

    She simply acted out of love and did no harm to the dog by giving him to a family that truly loved him and could take care of him.

    She did not abuse the animal!

    The over the top unprofessional actions of alleged people who allegedly love their job,
    ( according to you - so either you know the people involved from the animal rescue and your shilling for them, or your talking out of your ass) was despicable, and completely unwarranted.

    There were several kinder more intelligent options available to them, one of which I've already detailed.


Post a Comment

<< Home