Court Outcome: Bull Terrier Breeder Charged

Sharon McAdam appeared in Gladstone Magistrates Court on Wednesday August 7, 2019. 

At the time of the offences, the defendant was the person in charge of 87 Bull Terrier type dogs and 23 Bull Terrier type puppies. She owned 102 of those dogs and puppies, and there were 8 dogs in her possession that were owned by other people. 

The dogs were all kept at her property.

The defendant operated a successful dog breeding business under the name of Kupala Bull Terriers and had done so since 1985.

In the two years prior to the offence dates, the defendant had bred at least 36 litters of puppies, resulting in at least 135 puppies.

In September 2018, the defendant sold a Bull Terrier puppy named ‘Murphy’ to a purchaser. Murphy was flown from Queensland to the purchaser in Western Australia. On 17 September 2018, the purchaser collected the puppy Murphy from the airport, and took him to a veterinarian the following day. Murphy was examined by a veterinarian at Halls Head Small Animal Clinic who noted that he had very marginal tartar especially on the upper carnassial teeth, a generalised mange appearance, alopecia and crusting over his entire body affecting the face, legs, ventrum, dorsum and feet, and extremely inflamed skin. Murphy also had bilateral inflammation of the conjunctiva (eye infections). He looked extremely pruritic (itchy from skin disease) and depressed.

Vets stated that these conditions required treatment, and would have been obvious to a lay person for at least a week.

On 16 October 2018, an RSPCA Inspector attended the defendant’s parents’ property and spoke with McAdams about welfare concerns reported about Murphy. The Inspector sighted two other Bull Terrier dogs at the Gladstone property. They were the only dogs at the property and had no welfare concerns. 

On 28 November 2018, an RSPCA Inspector attended the defendant’s property to address allegations relating to the welfare of dogs on the property. The initial report was that there were approximately 5 dogs on the property. 

The Inspector walked to the house and did not see any dogs. He spoke with the defendant’s husband who stated that there were dogs on the property which were being used in a breeding operation conducted by the defendant. The defendant’s husband led the Inspector to a garage area near to the house, where the Inspector sighted 13 dogs housed in small crates, and none of these dogs had access to water.

The temperature in Gladstone that day was just over 32 degrees Celsius. The Inspector directed the defendant’s husband to provide the dogs with water, and noted that he did not have enough containers to put one in each crate.

The defendant’s husband stated that he was overwhelmed and glad that the RSPCA had attended, as he had already planned on asking for help.

The defendant’s husband said to the Inspector, there were “a lot more dogs to see”.

The defendant’s husband directed the Inspector to the dwelling and the defendant came out of the house. She agreed to show the Inspector the remaining animals at the property.

RSPCA Investigations uncovered 110 dogs living in appalling conditions at the property.
 
Evidence photos and video really paint the grim picture of how these pets lived out their day-to-day life. 

The animals were living in inappropriate conditions. The dogs and puppies were spread out in cages and enclosures at the rear and side of the property, unable to be seen from the road and not apparent from the house. 

Many of the animals did not have access to water, or appropriate water. Many of the animals were living in small cages, the bases of which were covered in urine and faeces. Some of the animals could not stand up or turn around in cages without touching the sides or roof. Some cages were damaged, causing wire to poke out and cause a hazard to the animals. Some of the animals were housed in areas with insufficient ventilation, and which were extremely hot. The putrid stench coming from the areas was overwhelming. There were dogs and puppies kept in a whelping room where the smell of ammonia was overpowering.

As a result of the welfare concerns identified, and in consultation with the Chief Inspector, all animals on the property were seized by the Inspector.

When informed of the decision to seize the animals, the female defendant stated that they belonged to her and not her husband.

The defendant was cooperative and surrendered ownership of all the dogs she owned to the RSPCA (102 dogs), and consented to the seizure of the remaining dogs not owned by her.

The Inspector was not sufficiently resourced to deal with such a large scale seizure.

The number of dogs involved was entirely unexpected.

The complainant Inspector and a team of animal attendants and Inspectors were deployed from Brisbane and Rockhampton to assist.

The extraction of the dogs took place the following day.

All dogs and puppies were removed from the property on November 29. You can read the timeline of events here.

During the rescue, Inspectors noted poor ventilation in the garage and the extreme temperature. There was an overpowering smell of ammonia and faeces. The bases of all the enclosures were covered in urine, urine soaked newspaper, and faeces.

The dogs did not have access to appropriate bedding and could not display normal patterns of behaviour. Some of the dogs were observed pawing at the cages and vocalising in a manner that indicated they were distressed.

Puppies and four other dogs were also housed inappropriately in the whelping room situated in the garage. The smell of ammonia emanating from this room was overpowering. There were two dogs housed in pens, and two dogs housed in transport crates. There were six puppies approximately six weeks of age housed in a round plastic tub. 

The base of all enclosures were covered in urine, urine soaked newspaper and faeces. The animals did not have access to appropriate bedding and could not display normal patterns of behaviour. There was one puppy approximately two weeks of age housed in a plastic storage tub.

22 dogs were housed in rundown, outside dirt pens. The dogs did not have access to appropriate bedding, enrichment or clean water. Many of the pens contained hazardous materials including exposed metal wires.

Many of the pens were wire shut and extremely hard to access. Many of the pens did not contain appropriate shelter for the dogs, and some had only an upturned garbage bin or water tank in lieu of a suitable kennel or structure.

Many of the pens contained excess faeces.

There were also four dogs housed in a garden shed with similar welfare concerns: poor ventilation in extreme temperatures, strong smell of ammonia and faeces, bases of all the cages were covered in urine, urine soaked newspaper and faeces, and dogs did not have access to appropriate bedding and could not display normal patterns of behaviour.

The dogs did not have access to clean water, and the dogs were observed pawing at the cages and vocalising in a manner that indicated they were distressed.

There were 12 puppies kept in a dirt pen outside. There was an upturned water tank in the pen for shelter, however this was not sufficient for the amount of puppies. The puppies did not have access to appropriate water, bedding or enrichment. The puppies’ coats were dirty and unkempt, particularly on their feet and bellies. There was insufficient shelter from the elements, including the heat that day, and it was too hot for the puppies to seek shelter inside the overturned tank.

There were another four puppies kept in a separate dirt pen outside with similar welfare concerns.

13 dogs were housed in individual concrete pens with one dog in a makeshift pen. The dogs did not have access to appropriate bedding or enrichment and could not display normal patterns of behaviour. The pens smelt strongly of ammonia.

Another 13 dogs were located in another shed, housed in individual crates.

Welfare concerns here included, access to appropriate water or bedding, some of the dogs were unable to stand without touching the top of the crate, poor ventilation and severe heat, overpowering smell of ammonia and faeces, and some of the dogs were observed pawing at the cages and vocalising in a manner that indicated they were distressed.

Nine dogs were also found in dirt pens behind the kennel blocks. They did not have access to appropriate shelter, water or bedding. There was very little shade in the pens and the dogs were observed displaying signs of heat stress.