20/20 expose - SPCA

 I have dial up so I don't watch videos on-line. If anyone looks at this, can you provide a synopsis? Thanks!

Ummm, that first one that showed was a puppy mill, no?  That looked like a puppy mill to me.  100 dogs and they referred to him as a breeder.  He should have his dogs taken.

 I agree that the first one should have had his dogs taken. But a couple of the others had they're dogs in good condition. I think that the guy who runs that SPCA has to much power and greed and should not be in the position.  And I don't like the looks of him. Lol.

When I watched the 1st part, I thought " OK, what's the problem with the SPCA taking these animals ? "   From what was shown, they NEEDED to be rescued !

But... in the 2nd part, the SPCA manager certainly seems to be on a power trip.

But what I found very unfair, is that the people who have had their animals taken, are NOT allowed to appeal the decision !  That just does not seem right. :(

I've seen this  story before and the guy, Garcia, seems to be a publicity hound. Not saying he isn't passionate about his work but he is too fond of the TV camera, IMO. I don't like these type of "expose" stories because it is so easy to slant toward a conclusion that may not be accurate.  I would not base a conclusion about any of the people shown unless I had seen for myself.    The reporter is obviously slanting the story, IMO, and acts like charging an adoption fee is some sort of unethical practice.  Everything about this story reeked of sensationalism to me, like most of these so called "expose" shows.

In part 2, 20/20 hired a vet and taught him how to use a video camera and sent him along as a "cameraman" when the Dallas SPCA allowed them to go on a raid of the last woman in the story. The only dirty cage was uninhabitated. A few of the dogs had some fleas and one had some mange that was being treated. The lady kept meticulous medical records, there was plenty of water and not one single dog was dirty from urine or ***, as claimed by the SPCA director. He lied to the judge. And countered the evidence of the undercover vet. A few dogs were actually a little overweight, which usually happens from getting a little too much rich food. She was as conscientious as any owner here. The director lied when he said a vet was present during the evaluations. Managers and other helpers were administering shots and looking the animals over. All the dogs were clean. And Texas has a no appeal rule. Once this overweight little lord fauntleroy takes your animals, there is no recourse. One lady was a breeder and shower. This took away her income and she and her husband lost their house and now live in a mobile home, here in tornado alley.

It's abuse of power. Are some of the seizures legit? I'm sure they are. Did some of the owners need a wake up call? Probably. But they took every animal, including the owner's original animal and prize breeding dog. I'm just as much for stopping puppy mills as the next person. But abuse of power is abuse of power and one day, someone's going to be able to press a monstrous civil lawsuit. All because this self-important "savior" just has to make $80k a year. Oh yeah, he's making more than twice the people he is saving dogs from.