IDA Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Legal’

Many of you wrote to your members of Congress in the past two weeks to request help in ensuring that the USDA is held responsible for its actions in sending Queenie to a tiny, antiquated exhibit in the San Antonio Zoo. We had long urged that she go to a sanctuary where she could get the special rehabilitative care that she needs after a lifetime of abuse in the circus industry. Instead, the USDA showed itself to be far too enmeshed with the zoo industry by acting as its acquisition arm rather than its regulator.

Several of you have shared with us responses from your senators and representatives indicating that our elected officials don’t understand that the USDA orchestrated Queenie’s transfer to the zoo rather than directing her to a facility where her needs could best be met. Likewise, the USDA appears to be successfully sidestepping the outrageous fact that Queenie’s trainer, Will Davenport, financially benefited from the agency’s deal-making, despite the fact he was found in repeated violation of federal animal welfare law.

We look at any response as a useful “foot in the door” toward getting some real help for Queenie in the form of attention from Congress. The key is to capitalize on that response.

If you have received a letter regarding Queenie from one of your senators or representatives, the next step is to follow up with a phone call to his or her office. (You can do this even if you did not receive a response!) Ask to speak with the aide who covers animal issues, and fill them in, using the following information:

• The USDA crafted a deal in which an abusive elephant trainer, who was repeatedly cited for serious violations of the federal Animal Welfare Act and faced formal charges, financially benefited , ending up $20,000 richer for it.

• Will Davenport’s violations were so egregious that the USDA seized two elephants, Tina and Jewel, in August 2009 because they were in such dire condition. Davenport also “threatened, abused and harassed” APHIS officials in the course of carrying out their duties.

• The USDA’s formal charges against Davenport resulted in $100,000 in assessed fines. But under the USDA’s settlement deal, he never paid a penny in fines and he sold his remaining elephant, Queenie, to the San Antonio Zoo for $20,000.

• The USDA claims to make decisions based on the best interest of each individual animal, yet it failed to ensure that Queenie was sent to a sanctuary where she would have received the specialized rehabilitative care she needed after decades of abuse in the circus. Instead she was sent to a zoo that lacks the space to properly care for even one elephant.

• This represents just one more example of a federal oversight agency that is far too entwined with the industry it is supposed to be regulating, and the American people are tired of it.

Queenie, imprisoned in that tiny zoo cell, is the embodiment of the USDA’s many failures to hold the welfare of its charges above the interests of the industry. Let’s use this opportunity to focus Congressional attention on her, and on the problem elephants face at the hands of the USDA. Please make your follow-up calls today!

If you need additional help in responding to your elected officials or if your senator or representative wishes to help, please contact Deb Robinson at circuses@idausa.org.

This blog was contributed by Deborah Robinson, IDA’s Captive Elephant Specialist.

On May 24, 2010, In Defense of Animals (IDA) announced that U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman dismissed our lawsuit to stop the Calico Mountain Complex wild horse roundup on a legal technicality. As you may recall, IDA, joined by renowned ecologist Craig Downer and noted children’s author Terri Farley, filed a lawsuit against Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to stop the largest roundup of wild horses in years — the Calico Mountain Complex roundup in Nevada.

We’d like to clarify the outcome of this litigation, further explain why the judge dismissed the lawsuit, and describe why we believe that this groundbreaking case bodes very well for any future litigation.

Read the rest of this entry »

Workers using Corexit in the Exxon Valdez Spill. Photo Credit : The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council

It’s been over a month since President Obama and the EPA gave BP 24 hours to stop dumping the toxic oil dispersant Corexit into the Gulf of Mexico. The decision was first reported in the Washington Post immediately after Congress heard testimony from BP’s own executives and scientists confirming our worst fears. Not only is this highly toxic chemical relatively ineffective against this type of crude oil, but it was now adding more pollutants to the already poisoned waters.

Numerous independent scientists have come forward to say that Corexit is really only good for public relations. This carcinogenic, mutagenic, and highly toxic chemical does break up the oil into small somewhat transparent ripples and droplets that are more visually acceptable than images of giant black tides drowning wildlife and covering beaches. What the cameras don’t see is the long term damage to delicate ecosystems that are now struggling to escape toxic tides of chemicals. According to environmental engineer Joe Taylor the sulfur and sulfuric acid based dispersant will also deplete oxygen levels under the water, killing plankton and everything above plankton in the food chain. This is not new information. Corexit has been banned for years in the UK because of the long and short-term damage to wildlife and ecosystems. The world was first introduced to Corexit in 1989 when it was used in the Exxon Valdez spill. Images of the workers during that spill spraying the chemical in hazmat suits should have been our first clue something wasn’t quit right with this chemical.

So – why at the time of this decision had BP already sprayed over 600,000 gallons of Corexit on the surface of the Gulf with another 55,000 injected directly into the oil pouring out of the ocean floor? And why, one month later, have they been allowed to dump even more? It is estimated that more than 1.4 million gallons have already been used.

Please act today to remind President Obama that this disaster could have been prevented and that he needs to restore the moratorium on all-offshore drilling in the U.S.

After two days of intense negotiations, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) today announced the rejection of a proposal to resume commercial whaling, banned since 1986.  Thousands of IDA members responded to our emergency action alert by sending faxes to President Obama and Congress, urging them to block the whaling proposal. Thank you! It worked!

The proposal would have allowed countries like Japan, Norway and Iceland, who never stopped killing whales in the first place, to continue killing them, with the endorsement of the IWC.  Thanks to pressure from IDA and whale supporters worldwide, we stood firmly unified, demanding real protection from hunting for whales. The world listened. And they agreed.

Although we prevailed in maintaining the global ban on commercial whaling, other significant pressures continue to harm whales and threaten their existence.  Starvation, increasing predation by orcas, migration through industrial polluted waters, oil spills, military sonar, and commercial fishing operations are among the many obstacles threatening their survival today.  The central location of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, for example, is home to an endangered sperm whale population. In 2009, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration indicated the population would not be able to withstand a loss of three additional whales due to man.  Last week, the first dead sperm whale was found floating 77 miles south of the sunken rig.

Please enjoy the victory – and take pride in the part you played preserving the moratorium on commercial whaling. Stay tuned for upcoming alerts to further protect marine mammals and their habitats. Next time we ask you to send a letter or fax, remember this – it can work. Every fax and e-mail you sent made this victory possible.

We urge you to watch a Vanity Fair video news story that outlines the plight and opportunities now facing the Bureau of Land Management’s wild horse program. This piece puts into perspective theBLM’s position on the wild horse program, IDA’s litigation to stop the roundup of the 1,922 Calico wild horses, and an overview of a recently announced private-public partnership proposal to return the Calico horses to the range.  The Soldier Meadows Ranch – Return To Freedom proposal for the Calico horses is a first-of-a-kind proposal made by a rancher and sanctuary to return wild horses to the range. It’s a great opportunity to break the BLM’s broken cycle of roundup, removal and stockpiling tens of thousands of wild horses. This proposal creates an eco-tourism opportunity, prevents the Calico horses from going to long-term holding and implements a pilot/model for managing wild horses on the range as Congress intended.

While this proposal awaits a response and approval from the BLM, the agency is sadly moving forward with plans to disperse the Calico horses around the country and sending the remainder to long-term holding – thus permanently separating family members for life.  We urge the BLM to stop these plans and to instead focus their time and energy into making this proposal a reality – a first step to reforming the broken and unsustainable program.

Last Thursday was the last public viewing of the Calico horses being held at the publicly-funded, short-term facility in Fallon, Nevada. IDA is opposed to the ending of public viewing of horses at this facility and urges the BLM to re-institute public access to this BLM-managed facility which holds more than 2,220 wild horses who belong to the American people.  It is ironic that the BLM uses tax dollars to fund this facility and prohibits tax payers from seeing their wild horses at this taxpayer-funded facility.

In the meantime, please be sure to voice your opposition to the unnecessary and inhumane proposed roundups of 2,000 horses and burros in the Reveille roundup of 200 horses (public comments due by June 25).

Watch CBS News Videos Online

Last weekend the CBS Sunday Morning news program aired breathtaking video of “Wild Horses of Nevada” at the end of the program. Filmmaker and burro and wild horse advocate Carl Mrozek recently took this video of the beautiful, healthy mustangs in the wild. You can watch the video by clicking here.

Please take a few minutes to post a brief comment to urge CBS News to do a news segment on the wild horse issue.  We hope that if CBS gets a huge response it may trigger broader coverage of the mustang/ burro story. The response over the next several days will be key. This is a prime & rare opportunity for advocates to make their case directly to CBS producers, via the CBS website so please take full advantage of it.

To post a comment after the video:

1) Go to the link, find the mustang video right there, and watch the piece — it’s only about one minute.  It was mostly rough/tough macho mustang stuff, but it definitely shows the healthy, beautiful horses, and Charles Osgood says these are the “… vanishing mustangs…”

2) Directly under the video – click on “[number] Comments” or click on this webpage to add a comment.

3) Next, click on “Add a Comment” and then click on “Log in or Create An Account.”

Below are some ideas to that you may consider when writing your comments. Please write original comments as they will likely be more compelling to producers who read them.

• Great video on wild horses – would be interested why Charles Osgood said the wild horses are vanishing.
• I would like to learn more about these wild horses – could you please do a news story on what is happening to them?
• More information please.

Thank you.

Working on the Korean Dog campaign can be more challenging then other issues as South Korea seems at times to be a world away. But then I get word of an amazing development that makes me feel so close to the activists working tirelessly for the dogs of Korea, uplifts me, and makes me proud to collaborate with them. IDA recently learned that in South Korea, IDA’s partner Coexistence for Animal Rights on Earth (CARE) received information about a remote dog meat farm in Gyeonggi Province. CARE activists paid a visit to the facility and what they found was appalling.

Dogs of different breeds were living in miserable conditions in soiled, ramshackle cages. Some of the dogs had injuries and all were filthy and uncared for. The waste in the cages appeared to have never been cleaned and the dogs sat in piles of feces. The conditions were so horrible that these brave activists felt they couldn’t leave without the dogs. At the risk of being arrested and possible personal injury, they rescued the dogs and brought them to CARE’s animal shelter to be treated, cleaned, and most likely, loved for the first time.

CARE has filed a civil complaint against the facility and instead of getting more dogs, the owner has agreed to demolish the buildings; a momentous victory for the dogs of Korea!

With IDA’s assistance, CARE is also gearing up for a series of lawsuits against dog meat shops in the Mo-ran Market in Gyeonggi Province, citing violations of animal cruelty laws. If convicted, the butchers could be fined up to 5 million won (around $5,000), which could be a significant deterrent for selling dog meat. IDA and CARE are fervently committed to seeing a permanent end to dog meat eating in South Korea.

Check out the amazing photos of this dramatic rescue here- http://www.idausa.org/campaigns/korea/korea_lifesaving_rescue.html

In late March we teamed up with the Mississippi Animal Rescue League (MARL) to help almost 100 dogs rescued from a “rescuer.”

The woman involved in this case is known in Mississippi for her rescue work. One nearby town pays her a fee to accept their unwanted dogs. In reality, she was not set up to take in and care for large numbers of dogs. Most of the dogs suffered from advanced mange and malnutrition. And as expected most have tested positive for heartworms, and many are unsocial.

This was the third recent so-called “sanctuary” or “rescue” to be closed in Mississippi in just the past few weeks. The lesson of the story is to carefully check out any such people or places before relinquishing animals. Sometimes, these places don’t merit the term “sanctuary” or “rescue.”

But there is a happy ending and new beginning.

There is a high cost for our government’s wild horses and burro program, it starts with the waste of tens of millions of tax dollars each year but ends with the devastation to wild horses who have their freedom, family and homes stolen from them.

This tragedy has befallen hundreds of thousands of wild horses over the years.

The latest victims are the Calico horses. Their tragedy continues today at the short-term holding facility in Fallon, Nevada. We wanted to share with you the American Wild Horse Preservation Coalition’s (AWHPC’s) report BLM Calico Complex Roundup: A Case Study of a Broken System for Horses and Taxpayers which outlines the high costs of death, injury and suffering for wild horses rounded up at the expense of every tax payer. Supporting this report is “Wild Horses — The Stress of Captivity” a paper written by Dr. Bruce Knock, Associate Professor at the Washington University School of Medicine and expert on the physiological effects of stress on animals. For a summary on the report check out AWHPC’s blog.

In Defense of Animals is proud to be a member of the American Wild Horses Preservation Coalition.