Rescue work is supposed to be about second chances. When shelters are full, and dogs face the risk of euthanasia, rescues often step in to give those animals hope. Many times this means pulling dogs from out-of-state shelters, finding fosters, raising funds, and ultimately placing them into loving homes.
But according to a few reputable rescues, concerns have been raised about how Idaho Mastiff Rescue in Boise has been involved in pulling dogs from California shelters on behalf of Paula Nourse of Gem State Service Dogs & Rescue. These reports say that IMR has been listed as the official puller of record, while Nourse’s group has stepped in once the dogs arrive in Idaho.
Most notably, reports indicate that Stanislaus Animal Services Agency has allegedly released numerous dogs to groups such as Gem State Service Dogs and Idaho Mastiff Rescue, often without clear assurances about the long-term safety and well-being of the animals. This lack of oversight raises concerns within the rescue community, as transparency and accountability are critical when dogs are moved across state lines. Ensuring proper vetting of receiving organizations is essential so that vulnerable animals are not placed at further risk.
On the surface, working together across states may sound like teamwork. Rescues often partner to save more animals than they could alone. The concern in this case is not about the idea of collaboration itself. Instead, it is about whether the process has been fully transparent for adopters, donors, and the community.
The term retail rescue is often used to describe nonprofits that operate more like businesses than traditional rescues. In many cases, this refers to groups that obtain dogs at little or no cost, sometimes from shelters or online, then charge high adoption fees without providing the level of care people expect from a rescue.
Animal welfare organizations and legal reviews warn that this practice can blur the line between genuine rescue work and simple resale. The problem is not charging adoption fees. Most rescues do, because veterinary bills and transport costs are expensive. The concern is when fees are collected without proof that the animals have received proper veterinary treatment or that the organization itself has provided direct services.
An article published in April 2025 lists several troubling examples involving Idaho Mastiff Rescue (operated by Tannya Blackwood-Cluff). According to that piece, Idaho Mastiff Rescue has allegedly promoted dogs it did not physically house, vet, or foster, while still directing adopters to apply through them and pay high adoption fees.
The same article recounts the case of Shorty, a dog who survived a shooting in Nez Perce County. The report says Idaho Mastiff Rescue did not provide direct care or step in after a failed euthanasia attempt, leaving other rescuers to cover medical treatment and rehabilitation. This story is one of the main reasons Idaho Mastiff Rescue has been described as having “retail rescue” tendencies.
“Flipping” is another term used in these discussions. In a rescue context, flipping means acquiring animals quickly and then adopting them out just as quickly for a fee, without investing in the medical care, spaying or neutering, or behavioral work that true rescue requires. This is not a new problem. Animal law experts point out that flipping undermines the public’s trust and can leave animals without the support they need to succeed in new homes.
When two organizations with poor reputations and questionable practices are working in tandem, as Idaho Mastiff Rescue and Gem State Service Dogs reportedly have, it should raise concern for the wider rescue community. The most important issue is always the health and safety of the dogs. If either group fails to prioritize proper veterinary care, safe fostering, or transparency in adoptions, then animals may suffer and adopters may be misled. For potential donors, adopters, and fellow rescues, these red flags are reminders to ask questions, seek documentation, and support organizations that demonstrate consistent accountability.
