Legal question regarding breeders

Thanks guys for all your input.  Evidently, the puppy was grossly ill when brought to the vet. The vet believes that the it would be impossible for the entire house not to be infected. The pups live in a romm with feces on the floor which I observed on a 'surprise' visit. They bathe the puppies before anyone sees them and when I visited 'announced' the floors had just been swabbed and the smell was still overwhelming.  I know very little about parvo but I'm told there is an entire procedure for getting rid of it in a large space?.
 
The complicating factor is the husband who is very interested in the $1800-$2400 they get for the dogs and had refused to let the woman take the dog in(I don't know if the vet will release the dog back to them) and he is one scary dude. The wife is terrified of him.
 
I think the vet is worried about limiting acess to sick dogs if she is seen as a reporter to animal control.  I will indeed speak privately to the woman.

No, MRV a person is aware that one puppy who is already in veterinary care has an airborn contagious puppy disease which is actually quite common among puppies. There has been absolutley NO proof of unsafe or unsanitary conditions. Further, all puppies should be vacinated at 6 weeks (although some people choose to wait a bit longer especially with smaller breeds). Howwever, for what even reason, and often this could be the vacine itself, one puppy has contracted Parvo. Yes it is contagious, however that does not mean that all of the other exposed puppies will get it. It could mean though that further exposing others to the virus will create more risks which would happen if AC took anything from the home.. In addition to that causing more stress to the remaining puppies by being taken by AC will weeken the other puppies immune sysem and put them at higher risk. You are reacting to your own assumption, most likely caused by the hysteria going on in the media, but I assure you such actions which would cause more stress to the puppies and is not in their best interest, nor the best interest of what ever other animals they would come in contact with because of intervention.

Puppies should NOT be vaccinated at 6 weeks.  They retain mommas immunities and those are lost somewhere between 8-15 weeks.  Pups need to build their OWN immunities and thats why the vaccine needs to be given AFTER momma's is gone.
 
Dr. Jean Dodds recommends parvo/distemper ONLY (modified live virus) at 9, 12 and between 16-20 weeks.  ONLY one of those shots does the job, so the pup who looses mommas immunity at 8 weeks is gonna be covered by the shot at 9 weeks....the additional vaccines don't boost the immunity levels, but vaccines are given in a series since it's impossible to know which pup still has mommas immunities WHEN.

Valbeck, Parvo has a distinct odor, which you already know, it also causes, a sometimes bloody, diarrhea which would mean other puppies, even if they were fighting the disease off, would come down with that diarrhea. That would cause a messy situation for anyone including a veterinarian. It is unlikely that a young infected puppy will survive this dreadful virus, and it is highly likely that the others would get it in very short order if they are going to get it. In fact, if they have not created enough immunity to the virus and have been over exposed they probably will not survive long enough for them to all be placed, shipped, sold or whatever. Yes, it is awful that this may have been imported as the initial exposure could have been in Russia, and it is also not a good thing that others may be exposed for coming into contact with these puppies. However the good news is that it is NOT likely that older dogs that are vaccinated will come down with the disease as it mainly affects puppies which are weak to that particular virus. Something to consider is that this could happen to anyone, and no matter who it happened to, it would cause a rather messy situation because of the diarrhea, puppies often die as a result of dehydration from the diarrhea which is so severe (which could explain the mess to you). Parvo is a heart breaking illness, but any puppy these people would try to ship to anyone will need a medical certificate from a vet and be seen to get one, that in and of itself limits the exposure from the possible sale of these animals. In other words, it would be foolish for someone to meet her on the road, and she probably can't get health certs on other infected puppies in order to ship them. I might consider something else though, and that is from what you say this poor woman is being abused by her husband. Is he also a Russian immigrant? If not, and possibly even if he is, the better recourse might be Adult Protective Services.

Glenmar I agree with you however these are shipped puppies and should have been vaccinated prior to shipment, the recommended vaccination protocol is to start at 6 weeks. Although I do agree that a home breeder might opt to wait longer especially when they can better control exposure. And yes it is after the mother's immunity is no longer interfering with the shot through breast milk that puppies develop immunity through shots. I don't think taking Dodd's vaccination protocol would be wise when talking about puppies being shipped overseas, however I also don't think they should be shipped that young, but we have no way of knowing what age these puppies were shipped. In this case it would have been better for them to be vaccinated prior to shipment and they probably were. In the case of a home breeder with limited, and much better control of exposure, I would not advocate over vaccinating, on the contrary over vaccinating can be harmful. Further, if a home breeder was not going to expose puppies to the outside world, it should definitely be up to the home breeder to decide what age they feel is most appropriate for their puppies/breed/situation etc. to vaccinate.  Following Dodd's advice in that scenario is a good idea if someone wants to, especially if their breed has had problems possibly related to over vaccination.

Immunities come in the first few days of nursing, before the actual breastmilk comes in.  Momma can nurse until the pup is a year old (if she would) and she's not going to continue to supply the pup with immunties.  Breast milk doesn't interfer with pups developing immunties with the vaccine, that just isn't the case.  A pup can nurse for a week, have mom develop mastitis and be bottle fed until weening and STILL carry her immunities for as long as 15 weeks.
 
Vaccines do absolutely nothing when mommas immunties are still present EXCEPT to stress the immune system, so while vaccines *might* be required prior to shipping, they don't do a danged thing.  Actually, I believe that the ONLY vaccine thats required to bring dogs into the US is rabies, and that's for dogs over 4 months.  Vaccinating at 6 weeks, regardless of travel plans is a waste of vaccine and an unneccessary stressor to the immune system.

Respectfully, I can't totally agree with you, however I can't totally disagree with you either as I don't think enough data supports either case. I do agree that it is cholosterum that will give immunity to newborns, but in each animal different degrees of immunity develops and/or is offered through cholosterum. Because these things are individual and would have to be tested with titers in individual puppies and adults, and because the actual harmful side effects are limited statistically I think it would be better to vaccinate prior to shipment and possibly a bit longer, prior to shipment than is recommended. Changing that would have to do with importation rules only, including importation rules to private individuals which are not for resale.