Friday, December 28, 2007

Posh Puppy of Tarzana and Beverly Hills closes due to protest

Posh Puppy Store Closes in Reaction to Protest in Beverly Hills! A Victory for dog lovers.

Watch video of the protest by clicking on link below:

Not even two weeks after HSUS unleashed the scandal that blackened the reputation of Pets of Bel Air, the Hollywood celebrity pet shop that caters to party tarts Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, yet another celebrity pet shop came under fire—Posh Puppy of Beverly Hills. On Saturday, December 22, the busiest puppy buying day of the year, a feisty group of animal welfare activists gathered in Beverly Hills for a yuletide rally to speak out against puppy mills and to promote adoption in front of the Posh Puppy store on Wilshire Boulevard.
“Stop! Don’t shop! It’s kinder to adopt,” they chanted in unison.

Posh Puppy, which has several branches in Los Angeles (Beverly Hills and Tarzana) and specializes in selling “teacup breeds” like Malteses and Yorkies for thousands of dollars, has raised the ire of local residents who are frustrated with puppy stores sprouting up on every corner. They came to voice their disapproval of the cruelty behind the growing trend of disposable accessory dogs and to educate the public that the majority of pet shops are supplied by puppy mills.

John and Michelle Yoon, breeders themselves and owners of the Posh Puppy stores decided to close for the day instead of facing down this group of lively and organized California activists. Hollywood writer and comedian Carol Liefer pumped up her sign and pointed out that, “they [the owners] did the worst thing they could have done from an Art of War perspective. They retreated like cowards. We won! They closed!”

Members of small rescue organizations and large animal welfare organizations like Last Chance for Animals, Best Friends Animal Society and the Humane Society of the United States handed out brochures, waved signs and hooted as supporters drove by, honking their horns. Wide smiles, banners and home-made signs were all on display under the blinding California sun. Four-legged demonstrators and two-legged picketers mingled, informing passers-by and drumming up the genuine support of last minute Christmas shoppers. But the message was not about buying this holiday season, but more about giving—as in giving an abandoned dog a loving home.

Though the picket regulations were clear about not blocking the entrance to the store, dog-loving Beverly Hills cops weren’t about to spoil our fun and looked the other way when actor/comedian Richard Belzer, of Law and Order: Special Victims Unit sat in the forbidden doorway with his adopted poodle Bébé. “I, like most human beings, love dogs and some are not aware of the grotesque and ill treatment in these breeding mills here,” said Richard Belzer. “They just think of dogs as money and we have to protect them.”

In order to make a point, protesters had been asked to bring their own rescued pocket dogs. Many of the dogs were wearing oversized price tags that were slashed down from “$2000 to Priceless!” Almost all the furry objectors were dressed in cheerful holiday attire, some with antlers, some with bells and Santa suits. Terri Austin, founder of The Amanda Foundation in Beverly Hills, was carrying a miniature dog in her purse—yet another pure-bred dog that had been dumped on death row. “If we came here every week, we could shut them down for good. Let me know as soon as you do another protest, I am so there,” she said.
The Christmas spirit had electrified the crowd. Carole Sax, a local rescuer exclaimed what fun she was having. “I’m having a ball,” she said, bouncing Gretchen, her rescued Chihuahua, (named after the late Gretchen Wyler of the Genesis Awards). “I’ve never felt more alive, doing what I’m supposed to be doing—taking a stand with all these nice people! This place is disgusting and we should shut them all down!” Moments later, Gretchen, the designer dog, took a dump in her designer pocketbook.

Like a California wildfire, news of the rally had spread all over the internet in the days leading to the event. Small local rescue organizations worked overtime sending the invite to everyone on their e-mail lists. Last Chance for Animals, the sponsor of the rally, had sent out an action alert to its California members and Best Friends Animal Society followed with an alert two days later. Then, adding to the momentum, the Humane Society of the United States acted quickly and sent out a call for California members to join in. The dog lover groups on were peppered with bulletins. We knew we were going to have a successful rally at that point.

Apparently panicked by the impending rally, the Yoons scrambled to move all the animals from the store and taped a sign on the inside of the glass double doors of Posh Puppy, claiming they had closed for the “safety of our puppies as well as our clients.” The absurdity of its wording wasn’t lost on protesters, who see themselves more as the protectors of the animals being sold there. (In fact, if the Yoons are willing to work with L.A. Animal Services, we could find loving homes for all of their puppies within days.)

With a sly grin, Bill Dyer, of In Defense of Animals, slipped a fistful of anti-puppy mill brochures through a crack in the door, creating a surreal still life juxtaposition of $200 sequined party dresses for dogs and sad pictures of dogs suffering in a breeding warehouse.
Reporter and writer Jane Velez Mitchell came with her two rescued Chihuahua mixes. All wound up and spinning like a top, Cabo, her little black four-legged protester was the loudest of all. As if on springs, he jumped up in front of the cameras and barked his disapproval of the pet trade for three hours straight. Jinky, a death row mutt from the San Pedro shelter and the author of rescue book “The Diary of Jinky, Dog of a Hollywood Wife” expressed himself literally: he lifted his leg and peed on Posh Puppy’s wall.

A short woman of about eighty whose face was pulled tight as a drum approached me. She was wearing a mink jacket despite the balmy L.A. weather and dropped her shopping bags and asked if she could join the group. “I love zuh doggies,” she said in a Russian accent. “ How can zay treat zem ziss vay?” I shrugged, thinking, boy, she’s damn lucky it’s not Fur Free Friday. That was in November and she would have gotten a real tongue lashing from this group. But sometimes you have to pick your battles and the battle of the day belonged to puppy mill dogs. I handed her a sign that my husband had made in our kitchen that morning that said, “Don’t be a bitch! Adopt one!” I told her, “OK now, walk around but you might, um, want to turn your jacket inside out? That look isn’t working for me right now.”

The star of the rally was undoubtedly Baby, a puppy mill survivor belonging to animal welfare advocate Jana Kohl. Baby’s story is heart wrenching. She had been kept in a cage as a breeding dog for nine years and her leg had to be amputated because it had been broken so badly in her wire cage. Her vocal chords had been removed so that she could no longer bark and annoy anyone with her cries. Her story broke our hearts but reminded us why we were there. We were there for her and all the others like her who are still imprisoned.

After the rally and amongst the blitz of congratulatory e-mails and phone calls, reports came in from distraught buyers of puppies from Posh Puppy in Tarzana and Beverly Hills. One of them, Jayme Rones, claims her puppies were very sick. She will be facing the Yoons in court on January 2 in Van Nuys, California. The rest of the reports, and there are eight so far as of this publication, are from Posh Puppy and other puppy stores in Los Angeles. The allegations are being investigated.

For dog lovers, the important thing to note is that even if a puppy store is willing to prove it is not being supplied by mass breeders (why don’t they?), this is a shady business with very little oversight. With all the negative buzz about puppy mills, it would behoove all puppy stores to be forthcoming about encouraging buyers to visit where the puppies are bred. If a breeder or puppy store owner is willing to sell a dog on-line, via e-mail, his ethics are planted in the gutter.

On December 27th, John Yoon was asked by Jennifer Krause of Best Friends Animal Society why he sells dogs when there are so many homeless animals in need at the local shelter. "We live in a free democracy,” he replied. “And people have the right to choose. Some people may choose to buy an economic car, like a Hyundai, and it may run perfectly well, and suit them just fine, and others may choose to buy a top of the line, Mercedes Benz. It's just a matter of choice."
The manner in which Mr. Yoon justifies his dog selling business reveals the way he thinks of animals as commodities. He is comparing dogs to cars. Not only is the comparison harmful, he is making a rather ugly social statement about people as well. To Yoon, the Hyundai is the shelter dog and the Mercedes Benz is his top of the line $3000 tea cup Maltese. To Yoon, the person getting the “economic” dog at the shelter just can’t afford to choose the top of line product that he sells in his upscale store. Yoon’s got it all wrong. 20% of the dogs at the shelter are “top of the line.” I have rescued two myself: a pure-bred Bichon Frisé and a show quality Cairn Terrier.

Mr. Yoon exacerbates his damaging comparison on Posh Puppy’s MySpace page: ( )
The Posh Puppy web page flaunts cars—Bentleys, Aston Martins, Porsches and BMW’s as arduously as it does undersized, over-bred tea cup dogs. Mr. Yoon is correct about the fact that it’s a matter of choice. Adopting a Maltese from a rescue organization for a donation of $300 is a far more ethical choice than buying a $3000 Maltese from a pet store. Not only is it a more ethical choice, it’s a smarter economic choice. If Mr. Yoon could adopt a Bentley with 3000 miles on it, I bet he’d take it.

Puppy store owners who claim to be breeders themselves, in an effort to assure buyers of their sincere love for dogs (as Posh Puppy owners and employees allegedly tell their customers) doesn’t automatically put them on Santa’s nice list. In fact, it just makes us wonder how many dogs they are breeding. Anything more than three breeding bitches puts a breeder under the jurisdiction of the USDA and there are minimum standards of care. To read the minimum standard of care for live animals in a breeding facility is depressing to anyone who loves their dog (

The dogs only need food, water, room to stand, turn around and have ventilation and some artificial light. You never have to let them out of the cage. Oh, and you’re not allowed to let them freeze to death.

In all fairness though, if we are going to point fingers at puppy stores and their suppliers, we should reserve a special finger for the buyer. With all of the information available in the press about puppy mills supplying pet stores, there is no longer any excuse for people to buy dogs and cats from pet stores. These buyers are not doing their homework. They want a luxury item and they want it now, at any cost and without any regard to where the dog might come from. When someone is buying an inanimate $2000 item on EBay, you can read the questions that go back and forth between the buyer and the seller, who is asked to prove where that item is from. Incredibly, it seems like puppy buyers ask fewer questions than someone buying a used bowl on EBay.

Carole Raphaelle Davis is an actress, animal welfare advocate and author of “The Diary of Jinky, Dog of a Hollywood Wife.”
If you have bought a sick puppy from a Los Angeles puppy store, please contact the following Web Site: and post your story here in the comment section.
Photos by Melissa Maroff


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Steve Neavling of the Detroit Free Press wrote one of the best exposes of the USDA collusion with puppy mills.

The USDA and state Departments of Agriculture perceive that their job is to help these puppy millers abuse dogs for profit.

That is why the mills that supply these pet stores are located in states like Missouri, Arkansas, Viginia, Ohio, most southern states, etc- they get the double whammy of protection from the USDA and their State Departments of Agriculture. Not to mention the legislators and officials they have bought (or that are connected to related hunting or farming interests. Or the AKC, that nows makes most of its money registering puppy mill puppies.)

And the fact that there are NO or few laws in these states, and what laws there are are not enforced.

Heck, in some of these states, dog breeder lobbyists ARE animal control or legislators or whatever.

Rotten to the core.

And as far as Yoons's claim that these dogs are "Mercedes?" If anyone wants to look at these dogs as objects, then these puppy mill dogs are defective, genetically impaired sick stock raised by hillbillies in shacks and outdoor cages.

It's a complete con.

9:53 AM  
Anonymous jinky said...

Who wrote the anonymous comment? I want to thank you!

1:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello again. I am sorry. I didn't realize that the second part of Steve's article wasn't clickable.

Here it is.

Agency Faulted For Not Cracking Down on Violators

July 12, 2006


OVERSIGHT OF BREEDERS: Agency faulted for not cracking down on violators

Dogs peered out of filthy, overcrowded cages, their fur matted and covered in feces. Not far away, flies flitted around two dead Pomeranians. Pups shuttered in a dark pen.

Animal welfare activists say those conditions prompted them to press the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 2001 to shut down a dog-breeding facility in southwestern Minnesota operated by Reuben Wee.

But for four years, they say, deplorable conditions persisted and dogs died before local authorities -- and not the USDA -- intervened and charged Wee with animal cruelty. Wee was convicted in September 2005 before being sentenced to 30 days of house arrest and barred from breeding dogs, according to Paul Malone, a Murray County attorney who prosecuted Wee.

The USDA's inaction predictably drew fire from animal welfare activists. But it also highlighted complaints from within the USDA's ranks that the agency is simply not enforcing the Animal Welfare Act, which bans the inhumane treatment of animals held in breeding and research facilities.

In recent years, the USDA has opted to educate breeders about requirements under the Animal Welfare Act instead of imposing fines or shutting down facilities.

For example, the USDA in 2004 opted not to fine Heartland Kennels -- which sent at least 123 pups to local pet shops in 2005 -- after citing the facility for repeated violations that include confining dogs to cramped, dirty cages that offer no protection from the wind, rain and snow.

In a letter to the facility, the USDA said its run of violations used to result in fines or closure, but current policy "is to encourage compliance through education and cooperation rather than legal action."

"The more we educate them, the more likely they are to be in compliance," USDA spokesman Darby Holladay said. "Once they are educated, we see a decrease in noncompliance."

U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, who said the USDA has failed to protect dogs, plans to call for an oversight hearing this month into the agency's handling of breeding facilities.

"I think there is a desire by the USDA to let the industry regulate itself," said Kucinich, who has two dogs. "Where is the compassion? These are poor, defenseless creatures who rely on human kindness and trust for their own survival, and it is the worst type of cruelty to subject animals to these kinds of conditions. The cruelty is compounded when you understand it's all for profit."

U.S. Rep. Joe Schwartz, R-Battle Creek, the only Michigan representative on the committee that oversees the USDA, acknowledged enforcement problems at the agency and said he supports an investigation.

"We need to get the enforcement of this more teeth," Schwartz said.

The USDA's Office of Inspector General has criticized the agency since the 1990s for failing to adequately crack down on violators. And in a blistering September 2005 report, the inspector general found an ineffective monitoring and inspection system and concluded the USDA failed to take action against "violators who compromised animal health."

That report -- and earlier investigations dating back to the 1990s -- found that the USDA has issued insignificant penalties to violators and often made no follow-up inspections. In those reports, inspectors and USDA veterinarians complained that breeders exploited the lax enforcement and endangered animals.

The Inspector General's office would not discuss its reports. USDA officials referred questions about the investigations -- and the agency's work -- to Holladay, who said the agency has stepped up its enforcement in the past year.

Frustrated with lax enforcement, the nonprofit Companion Animals Protection Society (CAPS) sent its own investigators undercover to almost 1,000 facilities in the past six years and found most violated the Animal Welfare Act. The investigations were documented with pictures and videos, and many, they said, came soon after USDA inspectors reported no violations.

CAPS' videos show sick and dead dogs, animals crammed into wire cages and puppies covered in feces and mud. Gaping wounds and lesions marked matted dogs. USDA inspection reports for those same facilities show minimal violations and penalties.

Deborah Howard, CAPS president, said she has made seven trips to Washington D.C. in the past four years, most recently this month, to urge lawmakers to start a federal investigation into the lax enforcement, but to no avail.

"The lack of enforcement is an old issue because enforcement efforts have increased," Holladay insisted, saying the number of cases handed over to the agency's investigative division has doubled in the past year.

But a USDA inspector, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the agency does not allow employees to speak to the media and he fears retaliation, said he and his colleagues are beset with low morale as leadership demands second and third chances for some of the worst offenders.

"When morale is low, you have inspectors doing half of what they normally can do," the inspector said. "Animals are dying for no reason. It's despicable."

"It's hard to get sympathy from the USDA," Howard said. "The USDA is contributing to the puppy mill problems. If the USDA properly enforced the Animal Welfare Act, there would be 1% of the puppy mills that operate today."

About 100 USDA inspectors are responsible for monitoring more than 6,000 commercial dog breeders and dealers across the country and an additional 14,000 zoos, carnivals and research labs.

Ed Green, a Washington D.C. attorney who lobbies for more USDA enforcement, said the agency has a "cumbersome, incompetent bureaucracy" that fails to use its limited resources wisely.

"The USDA has a broken culture," Green said. "They just do things the same old way because that is how they've always done it."

9:14 PM  
Anonymous Emily said...

Hi guys! I haven't seen you in soo long, we missed you when you were in New York. I think that it's great how you closed down that puppy store, I'm sure you know how much I love my little mutt. Talk to you soon!

2:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The pet stores and puppy mills all work with pet industry lobbying groups that help them hide, deceive, lie, and attack those who expose their crimes.

Just for a little insight into some of the people involved in these lobbying groups, see

The entire dog breeding business is a very corrupt one, and yes that includes the AKC. The AKC now makes of its money from registering puppy mill dogs, so they and their clientele are involved with pet industry lobbying groups like this.

Above all, they don't want exposure and they don't want laws!

8:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is there any solid proof that these puppies at Posh Puppy are coming from abused puppy mill dogs? Just wondering....because puppy mills are awful but I wanted some proof to back up these alarming accusations.

5:43 PM  
Blogger Dean said...

greetings to all.
I would first like to thank the writers of this blog by sharing information, a few years ago I read a book called costa rica investment in this book deal with questions like this one.

11:28 AM  
Blogger niz said...

Hello .. firstly I would like to send greetings to all readers. After this, I recognize the content so interesting about this article. For me personally I liked all the information. I would like to know of cases like this more often. In my personal experience I might mention a book called Generic Viagra in this book that I mentioned have very interesting topics, and also you have much to do with the main theme of this article.

10:43 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home