WINTER 2015-16
ACTION LINE
PUTTING HUNTING IN THE CROSS-HAIRS CHIMPANZEE REHABILITATION PROJECT IN AFRICA FoA REDEFINES WILD ADOPT DON’T SHOP
TAKING BACK OUR FORESTS
14 SPECIAL SECTION PUTTING HUNTING IN THE CROSS-HAIRS
4 NEWS Victory Lap: The Latest News About FOA’s Advocacy 6 NEWS Banding Together: FoA rescues three wild horses 8 SPONSOR AN ANIMAL The gift that keeps on giving
WESTERN OFFICE 7500 E. Arapahoe Rd., Ste 385 Cetennial, CO 80112 (720) 949-7791
22 FEATURE Navigating the pet adoption process
32 PROFILE Janis Carter, director of the Chimpanzee Rehabilitation Project in Africa 36
CONTACT US NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS 777 Post Road Darien, Connecticut 06820 (203) 656-1522 contact@friendsofanimals.org NEW YORK OFFICE 1841 Broadway, Suite 350 New York, NY 10023 (212) 247-8120
10 NEWS Cities enact pet shop bans to combat pet homelessness
28 FEATURE FoA’s Wildlife Law Program redefines wild
WHO WE ARE Friends of Animals is an international non-profit animal-advocacy organization, incorporated in the state of New York in 1957. FoA works to cultivate a respectful view of nonhuman animals, free-living and domestic. Our goal is to free animals from cruelty and institutionalized exploitation around the world.
LETTERS
37 CHEERS & JEERS 38 FOA MERCHANDISE
Toto, a chimp from our story Family Ties on page 32
PRIMARILY PRIMATES SANCTUARY P.O. Box 207 San Antonio, TX 7891-02907 (830) 755-4616 office@primarilyprimates.org VISIT US www.friendsofanimals.org www.primarilyprimates.org
OUR TEAM PRESIDENT Priscilla Feral [CT] www.twitter.com/pferal www.twitter.com/primate_refuge feral@friendsofanimals.org VICE PRESIDENT Dianne Forthman [CT] dianne@friendsofanimals.org DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS Robert Orabona [CT] admin@friendsofanimals.org DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Dustin Rhodes [NC] dustin@friendsofanimals.org ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT Donna Thigpen [CT] SECRETARY TO THE PRESIDENT Shelly Scott [CT] SPAY/NEUTER PROJECT Paula Santo [CT] CAMPAIGNS DIRECTOR Edita Birnkrant [NY] www.twitter.com/EditaFoANYC edita@friendsofanimals.org CORRESPONDENT Nicole Rivard [CT] nrivard@friendsofanimals.org SOCIAL MEDIA EDITOR Meghan McIntire [MA] www.twitter.com/FoAorg mmcintire@friendsofanimals.org
FOLLOW US facebook.com /friendsofanimals.org facebook.com /primarilyprimates.org
-
MEMBERSHIP Annual membership includes a year’s subscription to Action Line. Students/Senior membership, $15; Annual membership, $25; International member, $35; Sustaining membership, $50; Sponsor, $100; Patron, $1,000. All contributions, bequests and gifts are fully tax-deductible in accordance with current laws.
DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC INITIATIVES Charlotte Min-Harris [CO] charlottemin-harris@friendsofanimals.org
REPRODUCTION No prior permission for the reproduction of materials from Action Line is required provided the content is not altered and due credit is given as follows: “Reprinted from Action Line, the Friends of Animals’ magazine, 777 Post Road, Darien, CT 06820.” Action Line is a quarterly publication. Issue CLXVIII Winter 2015-16 ISSN 1072-2068
DIRECTOR, WILDLIFE LAW PROGRAM Michael Harris [CO] michaelharris@friendsofanimals.org
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Jenni Best [CO] jennifer@friendsofanimals.org ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT Kaylee Dolan [CO] wlp-admin@friendsofanimals.org EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PRIMARILY PRIMATES Brooke Chavez [TX] brooke@primarilyprimates.org CREATIVE DIRECTOR Jane Seymour [NY] jane@friendsofanimals.org
Printed on Recycled Paper
BY PRISCILLA FERAL, PRESIDENT
IN MY VIEW
PHOTOGRAPH BY BOB SCHILLEREFF
HOW I STAY INSPIRED As 2015 wound down, I was asked by someone writing an e-book if I’d answer a question she had posed to 50 longtime conservationists: How do you stay inspired (hopeful) despite all the negative pressures on wildlife? I replied that social movements, where people work with other committed people to produce positive changes in a society, are inherently powerful, and that in and of itself is inspiring. And giving an intelligent effort your best shot— because quitting isn’t an option—is exhilarating. Fundamental change is hard to come by, but it is within our grasp when we stay inspired. The key to staying hopeful is to operate on an assumption of success rather than failure—and to identify success on your terms. Taking risks, instigating, agitating and inspiring others not to water down principles or throw in the towel are as important as being victorious in a lawsuit. To win the public over and get people to champion your view of a problem and solution, you have to listen as much as you talk, while maintaining assertiveness, resilience and inclusiveness. And you have to recognize what change looks like and celebrate it when it arrives. For example, in early autumn change was apparent in a two-page, four-color interview on the subject of dietary vegans with so-called glamorous lifestyles, which appeared in the food section of The New York Times. From famous people to vegan restaurant owners and clean-living yogis, no one interviewed was held in contempt! To sustain one’s enthusiasm for animal advocacy campaigns, it also helps to have a sense of humor to ensure you have some fun while trying (as the former Texas writer Molly Ivins said, “To stave off the forces of darkness”). Another thing that has helped me stay committed throughout the years is the realization that animal rights work isn’t about me; I’m not the victim. In late June 1979, witnessing the deaths of 1,000 Northern fur seals on Alaska’s Pribilof Islands didn’t mean the club was coming down on my head. Recently, having to watch the most ghastly video of a Bureau of Land Management agent and contractor torment wild horses in Colorado with a helicopter, and subsequently break the leg of a foal, didn’t mean I was broken or left for dead.
So feeling sorry for myself isn’t an option. I’m choosing this work because passion drives it. And there is plenty in this work to fuel that passion. For instance, one California-based friend and Friends of Animals’ member showed me a moving example of wild horse social structure—which I’ll share for the heart and soul it delivers—and how the wild ones look out for each other. The photo Janet provided showed a stallion named Cowboy at Sand Wash Basin in Colorado, communicating and checking in with a foal in his band as they galloped along.
Janet explained that stallions drop back all the time to stay with family members who are tiring from a daily excursion or because they are under duress from roundups. She said many wild horse advocates have seen stallions go slower to pace themselves to stay with elderly or young members of their band—or they sometimes gallop ahead to encourage others to catch up. Seeing this familial bond is good for human hearts, and it shows, as Janet says, that human animals have no business tearing these gentle, kind wild horses from each other. Thus, ending the BLM’s persecution, interference and extermination of wild horses across the United States is one priority for the year ahead. Each of us at FoA has experienced seeing bands of wild horses free on the range as they should be. And that is all the inspiration we need.
Winter 2015-16 | 3
VICTORY LAP BY NICOLE RIVARD
Two rare macaw species gain ESA protection On Oct.1, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser vice (USFWS) listed the militar y and great green macaws as endangered under the Endangered Species Act.
Both bird species are endemic to Central and South America. The final rule is effective Nov. 1. Friends of Animals filed a legal petition with the USFWS in 2008 requesting listing for 14 species of parrots. The agency found that 12 of the 14 species warranted a status review to determine if listing was appropriate. “This is an important step in ensuring that these animals continue to sur vive in the wild,” said Michael Harris, director of FoA’s Wildlife Law Program. “It also exposes those who desire these wild birds as pets and showpieces for
what they are: namely the primar y culprits behind the demise of these animals in their native habitats. It is time to punish this criminal behavior and promote the importance of keeping wild animals, like the militar y and green macaws, in the wild and out of our homes.” The agency found that the militar y and great green macaws are in decline, primarily due to habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation, small population size and poaching for the illegal pet trade. Further, the existing regulator y mechanisms designed to protect these macaws are not adequate to prevent those threats from impacting them throughout their ranges. As a result both macaws are at risk of extinction throughout their ranges—the definition of an endangered species—and in need of protection. As a result of this listing, certain activities involving these two bird species will be prohibited with-
THE LATEST NEWS ABOUT FOA’S ADVOCACY AND ACHIEVEMENTS out a permit, including: import into and export out of the United States; “take” (defined by the ESA as harm, harass, kill, injure, etc.) within the United States; and interstate and foreign commerce. By regulating these activities, the ESA ensures that American citizens and individuals subject to the jurisdiction of the United States do not contribute to the further decline of these species. Permits will be issued for other wise prohibited activities only for scientific purposes that benefit the species in the wild, or to enhance the propagation or sur vival of the species, including but not limited to habitat restoration and research. The militar y macaw inhabits tropical, semi-deciduous forests in Mexico and South America. Although it has a large distribution, its population, ranging from 6,000 to 13,000 adults, is highly fragmented into small localized groups ranging from a few pairs to approximately 100 individuals. The great green macaw occupies humid tropical forests primarily in Central America and parts of northern South America. Its population, now ranging from 1,000 to 3,000 individuals, is in decline. The ESA provides a critical safety net for fish, wildlife and plants and has prevented the extinction of hundreds of imperiled species, as well as promoting the recover y of many others.
New York’s Dining with Dog’s bill becomes law
In October, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the “Dining with Dogs” bill into law, making the state more dog-friendly. The legislation makes it legal for dog owners to bring their pooches with them to outdoor dining areas in establishments that allow it. The law will go into effect Jan. 1, 2016. Friends of Animals was instrumental in getting this bill signed. We spoke at a press conference in Albany in May to garner support for the legislation, and we rallied our members to contact their representatives in the Senate and Assembly so they would support the bill, as well as Gov. Cuomo. “This action will give restaurants an additional option to boost revenue and grow their businesses by appealing to this new audience of dog-owning New Yorkers and their
four-legged friends,’’ Cuomo said in a written statement. “By allowing this additional flexibility and by establishing firm health and safety guidelines, this legislation strikes the right balance.’’ “Dog lovers and I are celebrating New York State’s new law allowing diners to bring their beloved pets with them when they eat at outdoor restaurants,” said Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal (D-Manhattan), who sponsored the bill. “No longer will our beloved companion animals be relegated to staying at home while we enjoy outdoor dining. Now they can simply come with us, like any other family member.” “New Yorkers love their dogs and want to be able to share with them the culture and energy the city offers, instead of keeping them cooped up in an apartment ever y time they go out to eat,” said Brooklyn resident Jane Seymour, creative director at Friends of Animals. “Dining with our dogs at participating restaurants allows us to share the diversity and social interactions we live here for with our four-legged friends.”
Winter 2015-16 | 5
BANDING TOGETHER FOA AND OUR SANCTUARY PRIMARILY PRIMATES COMBINE EFFORTS TO RESCUE THREE WILD HORSES
STORY AND PHOTOGRAPHY BY NICOLE RIVARD
6 | Friends of Animals
I
t’s the end of October, and after two weeks at Primarily Primates in San Antonio, Texas, 1-year-old Appaloosa colt Comanche pricks his ears forward and stretches his neck as far as he can, extending his muzzle just far enough so you can kiss it. But it takes another several days before the wild horse will allow anyone to stroke his neck without shivering with anxiety and jumping back. He sticks close to the side of Bindi, who, like Comanche, was ripped from her home on the Dann Sister’s tribal lands in Antelope Valley, Nevada, at the end of 2014. The Bureau of Land Management has been pimping out that land to gold mining companies. Unlike Comanche, Bindi, a 1½-year-old bay filly, welcomes human touch and grooming. She has established herself as the leader of this two-horse band, and she displays it through some food aggression and her hesitation to embrace Moxie, the
If you would like to sponsor one of the horses at PPI, please go to the special insert on page 8.
three-month-old wild foal Friends of Animals also adopted after she was orphaned by the BLM’s horrific roundup of 167 horses in the West Douglas Herd Management area of Colorado in the summer of 2015. Who can blame these wild horses for being unsure about themselves and humans? Roundups rip these youngsters from their societies— where they would have received discipline and help finding their way in life. While losing her family was devastating—her mom and band stallion outran the helicopters—at least Moxie’s life was spared during the roundup. Another wild foal was killed by the BLM after it broke its leg fleeing from helicopters, and an older wild horse suffered a broken neck after it fell while being loaded onto a trailer headed for BLM holding prisons and was trampled by another wild horse. In September, FoA filed a lawsuit against the BLM and U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell to halt further devastating assaults against wild horses in northwest Colorado. According to the lawsuit, the intricate physiological events that occur during a wild horse’s fight or flight reaction to a helicopter round up suggest that these are assaults against wild horses and are not humane as the BLM maintains, thus violating the Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971. The presence and free spiritedness of Comanche, Bindi and Moxie at Primarily Primates is a constant source of inspiration for our work going forward, including more legal actions and more disruptions of the BLM, an agency beholden to the cattle ranching industry and other industries that feel entitled to America’s public lands.
Opposite page, clockwise from left: Bindi, a 11/2-year-old bay filly and Comanche, a 1-year-old Appaloosa, were rounded up in Nevada in 2014. They were adopted by FoA and arrived at our sanctuary in Texas, Primarily Primates (PPI), at the beginning of October. This page: Brooke Chavez, executive director of Primarily Primates, helps Moxie, a 3-month-old foal who was orphaned after a Bureau of Land Management roundup in Colorado, step off a trailer after arriving at PPI Oct. 28.
GIVE A GIFT THAT KEEPS ON GIVING JORDAN: For the charmer Consider sponsoring lemur Jordan. Until he turned one, Jordan lived with a 20-year-old female whose grandfather purchased him as a birthday present for her. While she worked her boyfriend took care of Jordan, but Jordan craved the attention of his owner. One day after she returned home from work, Jordan bit her boyfriend, who then had to get stitches. That’s when Jordan’s owner brought him to Primarily Primates. His habitat is located close to the main office and he has developed a reputation for charming everyone who walks by.
EFFIE: For the shy one with a heart of gold Chimpanzee Effie is one chimp who doesn’t trust humans because she was born at a research facility and then shuffled to another biomedical research facility where chimps were used for toxicology, pre-clinical drug testing as well as infectious disease research. She recently underwent a life-saving hysterectomy, and care staff has noticed that since then she is seeking out more and more attention. 8 | Friends of Animals
RAISIN: For the goal achiever Raisin turned 42 in 2015, and birthdays at PPI are a time to celebrate accomplishments of individual animals, such as in terms of a specific behavior. Raisin, for example, opens up her mouth when asked so care staff can look for any type of abscess or cavity. Before arriving at PPI, Raisin had been snatched from the wild and sold to a roadside petting zoo and then to Buckshire Corporation, which also bred chimpanzees and leased animals to research labs.
MOXIE
BINDI
To read more about the three wild horses at PPI, see pages 6-7.
COMANCHE
Starting with this issue of Action Line and continuing throughout 2016, we will feature residents from our sanctuary in Texas—Primarily Primates (PPI)— to consider sponsoring as a gift for that special someone in your life who has everything. Or you might just want to give yourself the gift that keeps on giving! A photo of the animal will be provided to the gift recipient. To sponsor an animal monthly ($10$50) or annually ($120-$600), visit Primarilyprimates.org/donate; call 830.755.4616 or send check to Primarily Primates, 26099 Dull Knife Trail, San Antonio, Texas, 78255.
LOUIE: For the playful and young at heart Rudy, a baby rhesus macaque, is our youngest resident at PPI. Louie bit an employee when his owner brought him into a San Antonio bank, so he was confiscated from his owner and brought to PPI. He is particularly fond of playing outside in the sunshine.
RUDY: For the lovable brainiac
NICHOLE: For the diva What stands out about Nichole, a chimpanzee, is that while small in stature, she has a huge personality! So who do you think is the boss in her troop, which includes Jessie, Effie, Laura, Walter and Baxter. Of course, Nichole is! And being the diva she is she loves to comb her hair. Nichole was born on July 21, 1991 at the Coulston Foundation, a primate testing lab that has since shuttered its doors after years of mounting regulatory problems and opposition from animal advocates. Now thriving at PPI, she loves it when care staff uses the bubble machine for her enrichment.
Rudy, the first chimp to come to PPI back in 1983, is known as one of our smartest residents, as he likes to try to trade toys and other goods with care staff for some persimmons that grow above his habitat, but out of reach. He shares his home with his best friend Josie, who’s very protective of Rudy. He has a very special relationship with one of his care staff, too, and every morning during the breakfast round, they dance for one another. Rudy has come a long way from his former life. After being exploited in the entertainment industry—he frequently performed on the Johnny Carson Show—he was then sold to a circus, where he was placed in a side show and forced to live in a tiny steel cage.
BY NICOLE RIVARD PHOTOGRAPH BY ARTUR RUTKOWSKI
HOW MUCH IS THAT SHELTER DOGGIE IN THE WINDOW?
10 | Friends of Animals
CITIES ARE ENACTING PET SHOP BANS TO BE PART OF THE SOLUTION IN
COMBATING PET HOMELESSNESS
A
ccording to City Councilwoman Thelda Williams, there’s a golden rule in Phoenix: “Don’t mess with our kids or our dogs.” That’s why in September, when she spoke to Friends of Animals, her excitement was palpable. A federal judge had recently ruled that a Phoenix law limiting pet sales is constitutional. Because Phoenix was the first place where an ordinance was challenged, all eyes in the pet shop ordinance movement were on the city, where in December 2013, the City Council banned pet stores from selling dogs or cats unless the animals come from the pound or a non-profit shelter or rescue group. The plaintiff in the Phoenix case, Puppies ‘N Love at Paradise Valley Mall, appealed the judge’s decision, but Williams was confident the court would again rule in favor of the city and that the ban would be in effect by the time this article went to print. “We aren’t trying to put anybody out of business,” Williams said. “Pet stores still have the ability to sell animals and sell pet care products—just different animals. Maricopa County is a very large county, and had a tremendous amount of dogs that were being euthanized.” In addition to Phoenix, so far federal courts have upheld similar retail pet sale ordinances against constitutional challenges in East Providence, R.I., Cook County, Illinois and Sunrise, Fla. Puppies ‘N Love is the only pet store left in Phoenix trying to sell commercially bred animals since the ordinance
passed. Another pet shop, Custom Creatures stopped selling cats and dogs after the ordinance passed. And even before it passed in 2013, the tide was changing in Maricopa County—mall management at MetroCenter Mall and Chandler Mall would not renew leases of any puppy mill stores. The pet stores that were located there are now home to adoption centers for Maricopa County Animal Care and Control and the Arizona Animal Welfare League. Since the ordinance passed and Maricopa County launched its “Fix. Adopt. Save.” campaign, the number of animals euthanized has gone down. Last year, 10,160 were euthanized, down from 13,432 in 2013. Likewise, in Austin, Texas, where a retail pet sale ban was enacted in December 2010 and a no-kill plan in March 2010, the live release rate is 97 percent this year, up from 65 percent in 2010. David Lundstedt, vice chair of the Austin Animal Advisory Commission, who proposed the ban, said that Petland Austin closed in July of 2010, citing the pending legislation as a major reason. Although not directly affected by the ordinance, Petland Georgetown, 28 miles away, then closed in February 2011. Whether it’s getting pet stores to sell rescue animals or forcing them out of business entirely if they refuse to, Friends of Animals applauds efforts that crack down on the puppy mill industry and encourage people to adopt so euthanasia rates continue to decrease. We have been working to eliminate systemic killing in shel-
ters and pet overpopulation through a nationwide, low-cost spay and neuter program since 1957. FULL STEAM AHEAD Deborah Howard, founder of the Companion Animal Protection Society (CAPS), believes that retail pet sale bans will gain even more momentum because of Phoenix’s victory in court. People in the movement are thrilled to see courts confirming that pet store ordinances are a lawful use of a city’s power to promote animal welfare and protect its citizens by banning sales of puppy mill cats and dogs at pet stores. Already more than 90 jurisdictions in the United States and Canada have passed ordinances prohibiting the retail sale of commercially bred dogs and cats and rabbits in some cases. CAPS takes credit helping to usher in the movement—one of the highest profile pet-shop ordinances, West Hollywood, was a direct result of a CAPS investigation. Following a nearly six-month protest of the pet store Elite Animals located there, and a CAPS undercover investigation, the West Hollywood City Council passed an ordinance in February 2010 prohibiting the sale of dogs and cats in pet shops, with an exemption for the adoption of shelter and rescue animals. The CAPS investigation revealed that the store was selling puppy mill dogs from the U.S. and Russia and violating a federal law prohibiting the import of dogs under the age of six months for resale.
Winter 2015-16 | 11
12 | Friends of Animals
The ban has prevented pet stores and chains from starting the practice of selling commercially bred dogs and cats. Instead, there are places like Boofy’s Best for Pets, PetSmart, PETCO and Clark’s Pet Emporium that all work actively with rescues in Albuquerque, resulting in more adoptions and a decrease in euthanasia at city shelters. The combined live release rate of Animal Humane and the city’s three shelters has reached 81 percent. Boofy’s Best for Pets owners Jeff Smith and Lisa McKitrick were active volunteers in animal rescue long before they decided to open a pet food store in Albuquerque in 2010, so utilizing the space as a venue for fostering and adoption clinics is a perfect fit. “Having events and adoptable pets at our store certainly increases our visibility, but it also increases the visibility of the rescue groups we partner with, and the animals they are trying to help,” said McKitrick. “We prefer to partner with smaller foster-based groups. Without a public facility for meet and greets, it can be difficult to get their foster pets adopted. “We would be thrilled to have a nationwide ban enacted along the lines of Albuquerque’s ordinance. Too many pets are dying in shelters to justify large-scale breeding operations. Removing otherwise legitimate
brick-and-mortar stores from the sales channel would take a big chunk out of the market for mill pets.” Mary LaHay, president, Iowa Friends of Companion Animals, agrees. “I can tell you that here in Iowa we’ve gone from having 450 plus puppy mills in 2008 to 200 today. That’s success,” she says. “By reducing the number of pet stores, you absolutely help reduce the need for the supply—the puppy mills,” LaHay said, adding that another downside to pet stores is their potential for emotionally driven purchases. “They prey on that, as evidenced by the fact that if you express any interest in a puppy, the sales personnel are trained to get that puppy into the customer’s arms,” LaHay said. Weigle’s advice to other cities considering pet store ordinances: “Do it to save lives.” Howard shares the same sentiment. “Even if they don’t currently have a pet store, it prevents other pet shops from moving in there,” she said. “It’s a way for communities to make a statement that they do not support puppy mills and they do not want their tax dollars going to killing animals in shelters.”
PHOTOGRAPH BY ELIZABETH ABRAM
While Elite Animals closed instead of adopting a humane business model, others like Pet Rush in Glendale, Calif., are choosing to be part of the solution, not the problem. At the urging of Best Friends Animal Society, during the summer of 2010, owner Rene Karapedian decided to stop selling puppy mill dogs and instead offer shelter dogs. He then spoke to city council members when they were considering their own ban to attest to the idea that selling shelter animals did not hurt his business. Although he took a cut in profits by offering shelter dogs for adoption instead of selling dogs, he told The Examiner he also gained new customers who are happy he has rescue dogs. “They get a dog for a few hundred dollars who is spayed/neutered and micro-chipped and then have more left to spend in my store for supplies,” Karapedian said. “It’s a win-win for me, the customers and the dogs.” Subsequently, the Glendale City Council passed an ordinance in August 2011 banning the sale of cats and dogs in pet stores after CAPS presented evidence of violations that were occurring in Glendale’s Pets R Us. The store was special ordering puppies for customers from the Hunte Corporation in Goodman, Missouri, one of the largest dog brokering facilities in the country whose breeders had serious USDA violations. The evidence from that six-month investigation is still being used today in passing ordinances. Albuquerque, New Mexico, was actually the first city to enact a ban in 2006. No pet stores were selling puppies or kittens at the time, but Peggy Weigle, executive director of Animal Humane New Mexico, says city council members wanted to be proactive about reducing pet overpopulation, improving humane treatment of animals and reducing intakes into city shelters.
TAKE ACTION • Write the legislators of your community and ask them to introduce legislation for an outright ban for retail pet stores selling dogs, cats and rabbits (not just commercially bred because that could be a loophole since pet shops argue that there are “private” breeders.) Excellent examples of ordinances are Phoenix, West Hollywood, Glendale, Los Angeles and San Diego. In New York, outright ban ordinances aren’t allowed. New Yorkers should urge their municipal legislators to pass an ordinance like New York City’s. (Be aware that counties could pass ordinances, but where there is home or charter rule for towns and cities— they can opt out.)
• Protest, leaflet and write letters to the editor of your local newspaper. • If you work for a pet shop or puppy mill and would like to provide information about conditions, or to register a complaint concerning a companion animal purchased from a pet shop, over the internet or from a breeder, contact CAPS at caps-web.org. All information is confidential. • Providing evidence for legislators that stores are sourcing from breeders and brokers with violations is key to passing ordinances. Go into pet shops to obtain breeder and broker names for puppies and kittens. Contact CAPS to see if it already has evidence on these breeders and brokers.
IT’S TIME FOR PEOPLE TO SPEAK UP ABOUT WHAT KILLING WILDLIFE REALLY IS... A CRIME AGAINST NATURE
PUTTING HUNTING IN THE CROSSHAIRS THIS SPECIAL SECTION DELVES INTO THE HORRORS OF HUNTING
TAKING BACK OUR FORESTS uring the first weekend of fall, I joined my friend and her 9-year-old son for a run in Mohawk State Forest in Goshen, Conn., which the public has been enjoying since 1921. When we were about a mile-anda-half down a dirt road that winds through the forest, a car pulled up alongside of us, and the driver cautioned us that we should be
million- acre forest holds the record for most gun-related violations reported in the country, according to a review of federal records by the USA Today Media Network. Records show that since 2010, United States Forest Service officers have handled 8,500 shooting incidents across the country. Of those 926 were in the Pike-San Isabel. The reported illegal shooting has intensified precipitously in recent years. In the forest district where Martin was killed, the number of firearms-related incidents, warnings and citations jumped from 65 over a 12-month period starting in July 2013 to 324 over the comparable period ending in July 2015. Shooting is generally legal on national forest land except in marked areas, across roadways, near recre-
wearing orange because the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection had opened up sections of Mohawk State Forest to firearms deer and turkey hunting. After he pulled away, my friend’s son said, “Mom I don’t want to run here anymore, I don’t want to get shot.” His fear, sadly, is not unwarranted. A front page story in USA Today on August 11, 2015, read: “Forests grapple with 8,500 gun incidents.” The article was prompted by the death of 60-year-old Glenn Martin, who was sitting around a secluded campfire with his family in the Pike and San Isabel National Forest in Colorado, waiting to roast marshmallows, when a wayward bullet struck and killed him. The 3.1
ation sites and without a backstop. But whether it’s illegal or legal shooting or hunting, the problem with allowing such activities in areas of concentrated recreation use is that while hunters and shooters may know and obey property boundaries, their bullets cannot. While the USA Today article says that it is unclear how many of the shooting incidents are tied to hunting, Joe Miele, president of the Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting, which tracks hunting accidents nationwide, said he has observed a spike in hunting accidents in recent years. Some of that, he believes, is the internet’s ability to bring more news to everyone and competition between media outlets for something that will peak the interests of readers.
BY NICOLE RIVARD
IF THE NON-HUNTING MAJORITY MAKES ITS VOICE HEARD, OUR WOODLANDS WON’T BE WAR ZONES
D
Winter 2015-16 | 15
Only 1.4 percent of Connecticut’s population hunts, yet hunting is allowed in all but three of the state’s 32 state forests. On C.A.S.H’s website, abolishsporthunting.com, eight shooting accidents tied to hunting, which resulted in fatalities, are listed just for the month of September 2015, including another in a Colorado national forest. Fourteenyear-old Justin Burns died of a gunshot wound to his chest at Big Creek Reservoir in the Uncompahgre National Forest. The frightening thing about this incident is it wasn’t the result of illegal shooting—the teen was a licensed hunter bow-hunting with his father, and the man who accidently shot him was also a licensed hunter. Archery and muzzleloader season for various big game was in effect in Colorado at the time of the shooting. Bear rifle season was also active across the state. The good thing about the exposure of these incidents in the media is campers and other recreationists are finally calling for changes in hunting and recreational shooting policy. And nothing pleases Friends of Animals more than to hear that. Our work has always involved giving a voice to the non-hunting majority so it can take back forests and state parks from hunters, not only so animals don’t have to senselessly lose their lives to the recreational violence called hunting, but because it is putting innocent people like Glenn Martin at risk. We, like the Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting, are sick and tired of “the silent economy that encourages and preys on the passion of a few to kill the wildlife that belongs to all.” State wildlife agencies receive funding from hunter license fees and taxes on
16 | Friends of Animals
HUNTING
FISHING
guns and ammo—a clear conflict of interest that explains why wildlife is not respected, but treated merely as a target for hunters and why our state parks and forests are being turned into killing grounds. That recreationists have to fear for their lives while enjoying nature in our country’s forests and state parks is atrocious, and that state agencies profit from it, criminal. “We need to take a multi-faceted approach to the problem of hunters turning common recreational areas into war zones,” Miele said. “I believe a big part of this needs to be political, as we must put officials in place that are wildlife friendly and willing to stand up to the hunting agencies and conservation officers who want to continually expand hunting.”
WILDLIFE-WATCHING
WHAT NON-HUNTERS ARE DOING WRONG Miele says that even though there are far more people who want to protect wildlife than those who want to destroy it, they do not always speak with a unified voice or take action. Using Connecticut as an example, the 2011 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, found that 1.4 million Connecticut residents and nonresidents over the age of 15 fished, hunted or wildlife-watched. Of the total number of participants, 342,000 fished, 50,000 hunted, and 1.2 million participated in wildlife-watching activities, which includes observing, feeding and photographing wildlife. Since
Connecticut’s population is approximately 3.6 million, that means that only 1.4 percent of Connecticut’s population hunts, yet hunting is allowed in all but three of the state’s 32 state forests. According to the state, from 20042014 there were 23 hunting related accidents in Connecticut, including one fatality in 2011. While only one involved injury to a non-hunter, we think that’s one too many. “Recreational hunting interests attend city council and county commission meetings and speak up for what they want. They vote for people who will support guns and hunting, and no other issues matter to them,” Miele explained. “We, on the other hand, tend to have a broader world-view and consider other topics to also be of great importance, and we tend to vote for those who are in line with most of our positions. This is a problem for wildlife. “How many wildlife advocates will vote for a mayor who is anti-abortion and anti-immigration, but also anti-hunting? Many wildlife advocates see an R next to a candidate’s name and immediately vote for their opponent, without knowing where the person stands on the topic of hunting and wildlife.” “Wildlife advocates need to vote for the candidate who will be most wildlife friendly. If we are to see legal change for the animals, we have to ignore other issues when we cast our vote,” Miele said. “That’s what we need to do—to decide that animal issues matter more than anything else and to cast our votes along those lines. Society has elected officials who support hunting for two reasons: because the pro-hunting vote is unified, and because the pro-animal voter takes more than just animal issues into consideration.” Miele says another problem is a lack of activism in the pro-wildlife community. “It’s true that we’re a silent majority,
but those who silently oppose hunting are the ones who are creating an environment where hunting can progress unopposed for the most part,” Miele said. “Very few people contact their elected officials in defense of wildlife, and a fraction of those take the time to attend public meetings and hearings to speak against anti-wildlife proposals. Imagine what would happen if 200 people turned out at a county commissioner’s meeting speaking out against a proposed hunt in a public park. Instead, two or three people turn out and all too often one of them is wearing fake deer antlers or carrying a toy stuffed bear. We’re not going to be taken seriously if we’re not numerous and professional.”
STATE WILDLIFE AGENCIES RECEIVE FUNDING FROM HUNTER LICENSE FEES AND TAXES ON GUNS AND AMMO—A CLEAR CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT EXPLAINS WHY WILDLIFE IS NOT RESPECTED, BUT TREATED MERELY AS A TARGET FOR HUNTERS AND WHY OUR STATE PARKS AND FORESTS ARE BEING TURNED INTO KILLING GROUNDS.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH Friends of Animals is thrilled to learn from The Denver Post that dozens of concerned residents packed into an information session about the Colorado Forest Service’s new plan for the Arapaho and Roosevelt national forests that it hopes will cut down on the mounting tension between shooters and other recreationalists. The proposal aims to eliminate shooting on lands that are less than a half-mile from homes or in areas of highly concentrated recreational use. It also calls for at least one shooting range in each of the seven counties where the forests lie. One resident said, “I think the jury is out, allowing shooting within a halfmile of homes is too close.” We at Friends of Animals have a better idea: Why not just ban hunting in state forests altogether? We plan to get legislation introduced in Connecticut that would do just that. In the meantime, wildlife watchers, you can make a difference. Reach out to your local elected officials and tell them you do not support hunting in your local state forest. While the state DEEP doesn’t have a formal
mechanism for public participation when it is going through the process of determining whether its lands are suitable for hunting, such as the case with Mohawk State Forest, it does consult with local elected officials to get their input. In Connecticut it is even possible to reverse a decision and eliminate hunting from an area. The public can petition the DEEP commissioner under the statute Section 26-67c (a), which authorizes him or her to amend hunting regulations for certain localities where such hunting poses an unreasonable risk to people and domestic animals, etc. Hunting interests count on a lack of community activism to get their way with local governments. The miniscule percent of hunters in Connecticut and across the nation may feel entitled to turn the great outdoors into a killing field—but the majority of people just want a place to connect with nature without getting caught in any crossfire. But being a silent majority is not doing human and non-human animals any good.
Winter 2015-16 | 17
ON M M O C N I T BY MARCUS PIERNO HAVNICEK JAANS •LILO LUSTRATION BY
18 | Friends of Animals
hough we don’t have the whole story, one fact stands certain: The killing of Cecil, Zimbabwe’s celebrity lion, by a Minnesota dentist and his hired guides, has raised an unprecedented global outcry—one that continues to resonate even as it’s faded from the headlines. Millions have expressed their outrage. However, a no-less strident minority of sport hunters, Detroit rock star Ted Nugent at the forefront, has staunchly defended Dr. Walter Palmer as a fellow hunter being unjustly reviled. Their mantra is that hunting is a natural act, one that connects us to an ancient heritage; and any critics are, in Nugent’s words, “stupid” people who just don’t get it, because they’ve lost touch with who we once were. Legal and ethical issues aside, Nugent and company do have a point about heritage—if they and Dr. Palmer are descendants of Mesopotamian kings or medieval aristocracy. Consider Dr. Palmer’s brand of hunting: Spend large sums to gain exclusive access to exotic animals; be escorted by an entourage that does all the work, minimizes risk, and all but guarantees success; slay aforementioned beasts in apparently manly fashion; and make public displays to celebrate those exploits. Such parallels are part of the archeological and historic record, from ancient Babylonian friezes to Facebook. As far as actual utility practiced by those high rollers—eating, wearing skins or fashioning necessary implements—well, not so much. Even if the nobles feasted on wild boar or the king wore a fur-trimmed cape,
the point was symbol, not substance, a public display of power and dominion. Meanwhile, the common man was excluded from hunting anything larger than a hare, often on penalty of death. What Dr. Palmer’s kingly style of hunting has to do with our hunter-gatherer roots escapes me. I’m not some urbanite who thinks meat magically appears in bloodless packages. I’ve lived in Alaska for most of my adult life, the first two decades in remote arctic Eskimo villages. As a young man, I found work with a big game guide catering to wealthy clients like Dr. Palmer, skinning and carrying out trophy skulls, hides and antlers. Meat was given away, or sometimes quietly left to rot. It didn’t take me long to figure out such work wasn’t for me. Over the ensuing decades, I roamed the Brooks Range with Inupiaq subsistence hunters, the very sort of people Palmer and Nugent’s crowd claim to channel. But for my Eskimo companions, the object of the hunt was always fat meat or useful skins and sinews. The elders considered the animals we sought to be sentient beings that consciously gave or withheld themselves, rather than soulless brutes over which we exercised rightful dominance. There was no such thing as a trophy; antlers and skulls were usually left behind, and bragging frowned upon. Once, when I was speaking brashly about the quarry we sought, my traveling partner, Clarence Wood, scolded, “Quiet! Wolves are listening!” Of course, living with Inupiat didn’t make me one; and I don’t subscribe to wrapping myself in
borrowed cultural robes. My point isn’t self-righteous chest-thumping; but to offer a glimpse into just how far from our Paleolithic past our own cultural notion of the hunt has drifted. As a glance at cable television or the ads in any hunting tabloid will confirm, we’ve already made the transition to a pay-per-kill experience, where you shell out several hundred bucks at some fenced game farm, drive to a blind overlooking a baited site or simply cruise around, and blast the deer or feral hog of your choice, with butchering part of the package. Beyond minimal marksmanship competence with bow or gun, few outdoor skills are required. Pay a few thousand more, and you can pop a zebra, kudu, or heck, even a lion. It’s just a scaled-down version of Dr. Palmer’s faux hunt, and many mistake it for the real thing, or at least consider it an acceptable substitute. Yes, tens of thousands of Americans still practice hunting of the sort an Eskimo would recognize. This isn’t about them. It’s about Dr. Palmer’s version of the chase: a pathetic passion play that has as much in common with hunting as high-end prostitution has with a romantic relationship. Money buys the illusion of love and intimacy; but after that paidfor conquest, there’s only the emptiness of a glassy-eyed stare across the room. Alaska writer Nick Jans is a contributing editor to Alaska Magazine and a member of USA Today’s Board of Editorial Contributors. His latest book, A Wolf Called Romeo (Houghton Mifflin), is available from your favorite bookseller or from nickjans.com
Winter 2015-16 | 19
TROPHY HUNTING IN OUR OWN BACKYARD
THE BIG BUSINESS OF KILLING EXOTIC ENDANGERED ANIMALS IN AMERICA BY MEG MCINTIRE
A
fter the tragic killing of Africa’s Cecil the lion in July by a trophy hunter provoked public outrage on a global scale, it left us wondering why the exact same type of animal exploitation that occurs on a regular basis in America isn’t garnering the same reaction. In pursuit of a trophy to hang on the wall or a videotape of their sick exploits, well-to-do hunters in the United States are paying thousands of dollars to shoot defenseless exotic animals at point-blank range. All manner of exotic animals —including the Arabian Oryx, the Nubian ibex, yaks, and even the odd
20 | Friends of Animals
rhino, zebra and tiger—are being conscripted into the canned-hunt game and offered for “trophy fees” of up to $20,000. There are more than 1,000 game preserves in the United States, and the business has become exceptionally lucrative for those who raise the animals for canned hunts. According to some industry estimates, Texas alone brings in $1 billion a year from canned hunting. So where is the uproar over these ranches? Where are the protests, the public shaming and the front-page news articles? Thousands of exotic animals are being shot down in our own backyards and not many people
are discussing it. “Harvesting” animals on canned hunts should not only be illegal, it should be viewed as horrendously shameful. According to the Safari Club International, the first trophy hunting farm in the United States opened up in Mountain Home, Texas, in 1953. It began as a cattle ranch, which then turned into an antelope ranch —and then slowly shifted into a big game trophy hunting location, launching the disgraceful trend Americans are still participating in today, although it has become even more warped since then.
THOUSANDS OF EXOTIC ANIMALS ARE BEING SHOT DOWN IN OUR OWN BACKYARDS AND NOT MANY PEOPLE ARE DISCUSSING IT. Although canned hunts are advertised as “rugged, outdoor adventures,” in reality they are conducted in an atmosphere of comfort and convenience. A well-heeled hunter can fly into a hunting preserve here in the United States, and after a gourmet dinner, can spend the night in a luxurious hunting lodge. The next day, he or she will be given a high-powered rifle with a brief orientation about its use, and then driven to the “shooting area.” The area is usually a fenced enclosure from which there is no escape, ranging from a few square yards to several hundred acres, depending on how “strenuous” they want their hunt to be. The outcome is never really in doubt. In many cases, the hunting preserve will give a guarantee: “No kill, no pay.” Whether the area is large or small, the animals are either fenced in—so that they cannot escape and have no hiding place that is secret from the guide— or they have been habituated to eating at a feeding station at the same time every day for food. Microchip transponders are sometimes even inserted into some animals at these ranches to help track them down in an already enclosed space and the animals are given drugs, minerals, vita-
mins, specially processed feeds and sometimes growth hormones to increase their size and make them more appealing to clients. Internet hunting has even developed into a sick market where buyers can shoot animals lured to feeding stations with the simple click of a button. What many people are unaware of is that their local zoos might be contributing to the trafficking of the exotic animals to facilitate these hunts. While some exotic species are bred on-site at the hunting ranches, others are bought from dealers who get the animals from zoos. Large municipal zoos depend on baby animals to attract paying customers. When these babies grow up, they must be eliminated to make room for the new crop of babies who will draw new crowds of customers. They are sold to dealers, who in turn often sell them to research laboratories, roadside petting zoos and canned hunts. This way, the zoos can claim to have no responsibility for their ultimate fate. Exotic animals bought as “pets” and later discarded also add to the supply for canned hunts. Currently there is no federal law governing canned hunting operations. The Animal Welfare Act does not regulate game ranches, hunting preserves or canned hunts. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) does not prohibit private ownership of endangered animals and even allows for the hunting of endangered species with the appropriate permit. Friends of Animals has challenged the legality of such permits, and has succeeded in part to force more stringent ESA permitting requirements on hunting ranches that offer endangered wildlife, mainly from Africa, for canned
hunts. These successes, however, have been stymied by political interference. For example, after successfully challenging in court a blanket exemption that violated the ESA and allowed three species of African antelope to be legally hunted on ranches in Texas—as a result of our victory ranchers were then required to apply for permits—a Republican congressman attached a rider to a 2012 budget bill that exempted these animals from all protection under the ESA. In 2015, FoA took Congress to court, challenging that 2012 budget rider, and we are hoping for a victory in 2016. In the meantime, the outrage over Cecil’s death and the intense outpouring of hatred that was publicly displayed towards his killer proves that this is enough of an emotional topic to create change. But instead of attempting to change the policies of countries thousands of miles from us, we should also turn our attention to the killings happening right in our backyard.
Winter 2015-16 | 21
ADOPT DON’T SHOP STORY AND PHOTOGRAPHY BY DUSTIN GARRET RHODES
SHOP
NAVIGATING THE PET ADOPTION PROCESS 22 | Friends of Animals
I
have seen the slogan “Adopt Don’t Shop” in so many places, on social media and beyond, I assumed it was now gauche to buy an animal from a breeder. I was surprised when I posted a photo of the dog I was about to adopt, Turtle, on my Facebook page, and scrolled down my feed only to find that a friend of mine was also getting a dog, on the same day…but from a breeder. I have learned, though, from my work here at Friends of Animals—from personal experience and from member feedback—that there are misconceptions about adopting animals from shelters, both positive and negative, and a great deal of misinformation that I take for granted. While I am frustrated that my friend purchased a pure-breed dog, the reason it occurred is not all that unusual, sadly. I started my most recent adoption process at Brother Wolf Animal Rescue in Asheville, N.C., our local no-kill shelter. I filled out a somewhat extensive application and submitted it electronically. We had to give a couple of references, but the process was pain-free and simple. We were approved within only a couple of days. I had ideas in my head about the kind of dog I wanted: a Chihuahua (it’s one of the most abandoned breeds of dog and because I love Chihuahuas), middle-aged or older, who got along with other dogs, cats and children. I already know intimately the trials of living with a dog who is aggressive and I didn’t want to repeat it. For those of you considering adoption, I suggest you really consider your own “deal-breakers” and communicate them clearly to rescue groups and shelters you might adopt from. I began perusing Brother Wolf’s website for dogs that were already in foster care. I applied for two different Chihuahuas that sounded perfect—on paper, at least. One foster caregiver did not bother to respond; the other did immediately, telling me that the dog could not be around men and had a multitude of behavioral issues—a completely different story than was advertised on the website (in the caregiver’s defense, she admitted that it was her responsibility to update the website, and she apologized profusely that the ad was misleading and out-ofdate). Impressively, though, she informed me that the dog was working with a professional trainer twice a week, and that they hoped to make progress. I was surprised and impressed with how much training and attention this dog was getting.
MEET AND GREET I really wanted this whole adoption process to mostly happen online, because I cannot handle going to shelters. I want to take home all the dogs and cats with me, and I find the experience to be profoundly depressing. But Brother Wolf called me on the phone about a week after my application and approval, and I shared my experience with trying to adopt from their foster network; they convinced me I should come meet animals at the shelter—in person. I knew they were right. Through my work and in my personal life, I have been to quite a few shelters—some of which have been horrifying—either because of over-crowding, cleanliness or lack thereof, the condition of the animals themselves or all of the above. So walking into Brother Wolf was an unexpected experience—it was exceptionally clean, organized, efficient, filled with staff, volunteers and people there to peruse the dogs and cats. I was allowed to look around freely, and immediately found myself drawn to certain dogs (none of which were Chihuahuas). I was even allowed to take some of the dogs for walks, and spend time in a private room with others—an opportunity to get to know them, one on one. One of the staff members introduced me to various dogs and answered questions; she also told me about various behavior issues they were aware of. ARE YOU READY FOR COMMITMENT? Denise Bitz, the founder of Brother Wolf Animal rescue, told me, “Most animals end up in a shelter due to no fault of their own. Most animals end up in shelters because of humans relocating, human death/divorce or frankly, because people are too lazy to address a small problem because we live in a society where folks want immediate results without putting any work into something. I have seen it with something as simple as house-training a dog.” From the many calls we receive at Friends of Animals, I knew she was right. I also know that many people aren’t prepared for veterinary emergencies; they don’t have a savings account for their pet—which they should. My veterinarian recommends that everyone have $1,000 set aside for emergencies. In truth, that amount of money won’t cover many serious issues, but it will easily cover unexpected minor ones. Animal rescues and shelters put a lot of work
Winter 2015-16 | 23
into assessing the behavior of animals, for reasons of marketing, compatibility and the desire to match each cat and dog up with its forever home. By no means am I suggesting that anyone makes things up, but it’s not in your best interest to assume that what they tell you will end up being completely factual. That’s not the fault of the shelter, but it’s because as soon as the dog or cat ends up in your home there’s a new dynamic to maneuver for everyone, and behavior is flexible based on new stressors that shelters may not be able to predict. In other words, be prepared for what they don’t tell you; be prepared to have to work with a trainer in some cases, if that’s what it takes. Be prepared for it not working out perfectly at first. Like all relationships, it takes time to work out the kinks. KEEP AN OPEN MIND According to The National Council on Pet Population Study and Policy 25 percent of dogs that enter shelters are purebred. As Bitz reminded me: Shelters and rescues often take animals directly from breeding operations, sometimes even small kittens and puppies, so don’t assume you can’t find a particular breed at a local shelter. And even if you can’t, there are breed-specific rescue groups throughout North America. If that’s the route you choose to go, be forewarned: Rescue groups have a tendency to have the most difficult adoption process, which some find frustrating. Adoption fees are likely to be high because they are privately funded and application processes are often lengthy. Expect home visits, delays and some surprises along the way, as they are usually staffed completely by a network of volunteers. While the work they do is admirable, there are numerous circumstances that can make the experience lengthy and frustrating. And most importantly of all: Challenge yourself in terms of the kind of animal you are willing to adopt. You might find the love of your life in another breed, or mix of breeds—as I did. I might
24 | Friends of Animals
sound overly critical of breed specific rescues, but I am not. I am just pointing out a somewhat common experience. Lastly, the biggest case against adopting a pure-breed dog is cost: Many breeds of dogs are susceptible to diseases and problems that might be extraordinarily expensive to treat. Are you prepared for that? EXPECT THE UNEXPECTED Alas, I didn’t end up adopting from Brother Wolf, but not because they weren’t wonderful. At the time I went, the dogs I was interested in were not ideal for being around other dogs, cats and/or children, and thank goodness they were honest with me. I ended up adopting a dog that a friend brought to my attention—a four-year-old pug mix named Turtle Dove, whom I fell instantly, head-over-heels in love with. I was told that Turtle was great with other dogs, but that he’d need some work with leash training, as he wasn’t really walked because the family he was living with had a large, fenced in backyard. When he came to live with us, we got to know a Turtle Dove that was both recognizable and foreign from the stories we’d been told. While he is definitely pretty much perfect around other dogs, it turns out that he’s so terrified of people he doesn’t know that he has full-blown panic attacks; he starts shaking and drooling profusely when he encounters a stranger on the street; he tries desperately to flee. Taking him for a simple walk is a stress-inducing chore for everyone involved—save for the times we simply take him to the woods where he won’t encounter humans. I love Turtle ridiculously—psychological meltdowns and all. And we are completely committed to him, forever, but he’s been full of surprises. Some people say that it’s prohibitively expensive to adopt from a rescue or shelter these days, too—often costing as much as a breeder. Sometimes that’s true, depending on the breed of dog. But Denise Bitz reminded
ADOPT DON’T SHOP. SPAY AND NEUTER. BE PREPARED AND COMMITTED AND, MOST OF ALL, PATIENT. THE REWARDS ARE INDESCRIBABLE. me that the animals “have way more vet care than any animal you will ever purchase from a breeder. Also, a lot of our animals are in foster care so we know a lot about the animals’ personality and our foster homes even work on basic training and housebreaking, etc. I don’t think you will find a lot of breeders who do that. Sadly, the majority of breeders out there are all about the profit, and will compromise even the most basic medical care to turn a larger profit on selling the animal.”
Above: Turtle is particularly fond of nature walks with Dustin and his partner, Bray Creech, depicted here. Below: Dustin and Turtle
HAPPILY EVER AFTER I asked Bitz whether many animals are returned to Brother Wolf, and if so why. Of course I wondered if it’s because of how animals can be unpredictable in a new situation or with a new family. She told me that their return rate is very low, but offered a new perspective, too: “We used to look at returns as a failure on us BUT we have changed our perception on this as we have grown and evolved. We look at returns as a way to gather more information about a particular animal that we may not have known previously, and hopefully use this information to find them the best next home possible.” And what happens if you adopt a “damaged” dog? This lesson has already struck me in a profound way, and I am sure that those of you who live with quirky rescued animals know exactly what I am talking about: It’s those very quirks that might make you fall madly in love with them. My friend Frank, who worked at Brother Wolf before he retired and has lived with five rescue dogs, said something that really struck a chord: “When you form a bond with an animal who has emotional scars, you get to experience true unconditional love. My dogs have taught me everything about life and living that I know.” I couldn’t agree more.
Winter 2015-16 | 25
HOW REAL IS THIS RESCUE? BY MEG MCINTIRE
Don’t get fooled by a breeder masquerading as a rescue organization It’s a sad reality that there are millions of homeless pets hoping to find a forever home and a loving family. An even more upsetting reality is that there are indeed people looking to take advantage of families seeking to bring one of these pets into their lives. All around the country, there are dog breeding operations who are using online pet adoption sites, once almost exclusively the realm of dutiful charities saving animals from abusive homes, to peddle dogs. Many pretend to be rescue organizations, while others have actually formed legal “charities” to sell animals raised in factory-like facilities. One example of these faux rescue groups caught our attention earlier this year after a supposed dog “rescuer” from Alabama, previously charged with animal cruelty, was arrested in Connecticut after police caught her hauling a trailer loaded with nearly 30 dogs who had no ventilation. Despite a previous animal cruelty conviction, her state still let her operate her abusive shelter and traffic dogs to northern states, which is exactly why it’s so important to be 100-percent sure you’re working with a reputable adoption agency when seeking to rescue a dog. SO HOW CAN YOU MAKE SURE YOU’RE ADOPTING FROM A REPUTABLE RESCUER INSTEAD OF SUPPORTING AN UNDERGROUND DOG BREEDING OPERATION? WE’VE COMPILED A LIST OF QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER: • Truly, the only sure way to find out if the group is legitimate is for you to insist on seeing the place where the dog was kept. Fake rescues often insist on shipping the dog to you or meeting in a neutral location. • Be sure to read the fine print on the rescue group’s website or advertisement. The ads from fake rescues usually employ careful language to avoid fraud and use fake photos of happy dogs to try and seem more legitimate. • Do a background check on the group or the individual you’re in contact with by searching for reviews or testimonials online. Just a quick Google search could turn up past news articles or criminal records associated with the organization. • One red flag should be if the organization does not require a home visit with you before you adopt the dog. Most reputable rescues care deeply about the safety of the dogs and will want to make sure you’ll be a responsible owner and a good fit for the dog! • The rescue organization should require you to provide at least two references and a veterinary reference as well so that they know you are prepared to adopt the dog.
26 | Friends of Animals
It takes 40 fox skins to make a fur coat. But only one photo to shame someone for wearing it. Tag your pics of fur with #FlipOffFur and have your posts shared by our fox on Twitter and Instagram: @FlipOffFur
DON’T BE COMFORTABLE IN THEIR SKIN.
FriendsofAnimals.org It takes 40 fox skins to make a fur coat. But only one photo to shame someone for wearing it. DON’T IN THEIR SKIN. Tag your pics of fur BE withCOMFORTABLE #FlipOffFur and have your posts shared by our fox on Twitter and Instagram: @FlipOffFur
FriendsofAnimals.org
BY NICOLE RIVARD
FOA’S WILDLIFE LAW PROGRAM DISTINGUISHES ITSELF FROM THE PACK BY REDEFINING
Wild
PHOTOGRAPH BY MIGUEL CAPELO
On the cusp of a new year, the Wildlife Law Program is determined to fulfill its purpose by focusing on achieving four specific goals: 1. Establishing recognition of a right to ethical consideration for all wild animals 2. End the importation into the U.S. of trophy-hunted animals by 2020. 3. Establish a model to decommodify public lands and the animals that make these habitats their home 4. Put an end to round-ups of wild horses on federal public lands and forcibly drugging them with fertility control.
28 | Friends of Animals
R
ecently I was at a press conference for Cecil’s Law—an historic bill drafted by Friends of Animals’ Wildlife Law Program Director Michael Harris, that would ban the import, possession, sale or transportation in New York of five species of animals native to Africa—and a photographer from the New York Post asked me how FoA is different than PETA. The first thought that came to mind: FoA is a serious organization whose mission is not to generate gimmicky headlines but to create legislation and change that results in actual protections for domestic and free-roaming animals. One example of this mission in action is our Wildlife Law Program, which has evolved since its inception in 2013. These days humans often refer to “wild animals” or “wildlife” only to distinguish them from truly domesticated animals. Little thought is given to what “wild” should mean, and how to protect it. The truth is, a majority of all “wild” animals are not wild at all today. They are merely free-roaming, human managed animals. But FoA’s definition of wild means no human exploitation and manipulation of the animal, period. Humans should not be managing any wild animal by keeping them in small “herd areas,” or limiting their population through culling, relocation or forcibly drugging them with fertility control drugs. Accordingly, FoA’s Wildlife Law Program is focused on reestablishing the meaning—both legally and ethically—of the word “wild,” as used to describe wild animals and wilderness. The program seeks to ensure that wild animals can live independently and free in their natural habitats by promoting their standing in the law. “Conservationists, wildlife advocates and particularly the government, have seemingly forgotten what ‘wild’ means with regards to the natural world,” said Harris. “This is made clear by the way we now regulate and manage public lands and wildlife. We want to remind people that we still have wildlife and wild places that need our protection. The Wildlife Law Program’s purpose is to make wildness relevant again for animals and for people.”
Winter2015-16 2015-16| |29 29 Winter
HERE’S A CLOSER LOOK AT SOME OF OUR WORK AND HOW IT ENCOMPASSES THOSE GOALS. GOAL ONE
One example of the first goal (and the 4th goal) is recent litigation brought against the Bureau of Land Management, challenging its treatment of wild horses in Colorado. Over the summer, FoA filed a lawsuit stating that BLM’s decision—which authorizes the continued removal of wild horses from the West Douglas Herd for several years, including helicopter drive trapping, helicopter assisted roping and bait and water trapping—fails to fulfill the agency’s obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act. BLM did not provide a reasonable discussion of the impacts to targeted wild horses themselves, including the likelihood of short and long-term physical, social and behavioral changes associated with roundups and removals. According to the lawsuit, the intricate physiological events that occur during a wild horse’s fight-orflight reaction to a helicopter round up suggest that these are assaults against them and are not humane as the BLM maintains, thus violating the Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971. “The Bureau of Land Management has never really publically examined the emotional, physical or social impacts to wild horses subjected to helicopter roundups on federal public lands,” said Harris. “Coloradans should demand they do so before some of our last wild horses are subjected to such devastating physical and emotional pain. The BLM’s decision record states that helicopter roundups may occur over the next couple years. Winning this
30 | Friends of Animals
lawsuit could put an end to roundups in the Douglas area in the future. Moreover, we at FoA believe that once the public realizes the significant trauma and pain that these wild horses go through at the hands of BLM, there will be stronger public support for wild horses and for their protection on public lands like there was back in 1971 when the Wild Horse and Burro Act was passed.”
GOAL TWO
FoA was one of the first international advocacy organizations to challenge the long-held belief that regulated hunting can be a valuable conservation tool for endangered animals. The truth is, legalized hunting fuels illegal poaching. Hunting removes the stigma of killing these animals, and provides means for poachers to smuggle animals and their parts into the market. In 2015 we worked with the federal government to protect African elephants from hunters in Zimbabwe; filed a legal challenge over the killing of two black rhinos in Namibia; gave notice of our intent to sue the government to prevent any further hunting of African lions; and created Cecil’s Law, which is working its way through the New York state legislature. We have even taken Congress to court, challenging a 2012 budget rider seeking to remove captive African antelope from the endangered species list s to allow them to be hunted on Texas ranches with no permits. “Eliminating cultural bias is something we need to make people aware of through our work in sport hunting. The United States takes such a heavy hand when it comes to other cultures’ use of animals, but we totally pat each other on the backs about our own use of them,” Harris said.
GOAL THREE
In 2013, FoA filed suit against the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service challenging its plan to kill more than
3,600 barred owls in the Pacific Northwest. In approving the Barred Owl Removal Plan, the federal defendants identified the barred owl as a new threat to the Northern spotted owl. The Barred Owl Removal Plan only scapegoats barred owls instead of recognizing the primary threat to Northern spotted owls—habitat destruction, primarily due to logging of old growth forest in California, Oregon and Washington. Not only is the Barred Owl Removal Plan immoral, unethical and cruel, it is illegal. While the District Court ruled against Friends of Animals and Predator Defense in their fight to save barred owls from the shotgun, we continue to press our legal case in the courts. In July we filed an appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and at press time we were poised to present our legal arguments against the plan to that court. FoA recognizes the immense significance of this case, because ethically, the government has never previously proposed such a mass killing. Legally, the barred owl decision cuts a massive exception to the stringent protections once provided under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act for species like the barred owl. We need the courts to restore these protections.
GOAL FOUR
While most of our wild horse litigation involves this goal, our filing of a legal petition last summer with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)requesting the agency consider new scientific evidence demonstrating the need to cancel the registration of the drug porcine zona pellucida, or PZP, for population control of America’s wild horses and burros is significant. The registration of PZP was issued to the Humane Society of the United States in 2012. Information is now available to the EPA regarding the unintended—and previously undisclosed—side effects on both
PHOTOGRAPH BY KARSTEN MADSEN
targeted mares and wild horses in general. It not only shows unreasonable adverse effects, but also indicates the use of PZP on wild horses likely violates the Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971. “When the HSUS obtained ESA registration for PZP, the organization never provided evidence that PZP doesn’t have negative side effects. It just provided information about the efficacy of PZP and actually requested waivers for most of the studies ordinarily required from an applicant seeking pesticide registration—including a toxicity study, ecological effects and environmental fate guideline study,” said Harris. The majority of research submitted by HSUS was published by Dr. Jay Kirkpatrick, a veterinarian who manufactures PZP, and did not consider the biological, social and behavioral effects the drug can have on wild horses. More recent research included in FoA’s petition has demonstrated repeated applications of PZP can cause physical damage to treated mares; it is not completely reversible; it can increase mortality in foals post-PZP effectiveness; and it interferes with herd cohesion, which is critical to the overall health of wild horses. In addition, preventing mares from producing foals can create a genetic bottleneck that may ultimately extinguish the species as a whole. Said Harris: “We are going to be pushing disclosure of impact on animals themselves in NEPA documents—not just for wild horses—but in any case that we can. I think agencies fail misera-
bly to disclose the pain and suffering that all animals go through as a result of ‘management’ and fertility control. And I believe that we will find a court to say, ‘Yeah, that’s part of the human environment that you have to evaluate…that if animals suffer, people who care about them will suffer too.” As long as human-controlled courtrooms and legislatures around the world make horrific judgments about the fate of wild animals, there is work to be done by FoA’s Wildlife Law Program. Today, public lands
in the United States are a bleak place—largely ecologically unsound because of extensive human involvement. But FoA believes a return to ecological balance is not lost forever. Our Wildlife Law Program will continue to push for true ecological zones on public lands; areas where the landscape and animals are free from exploitation and management.
As Aldo Leopold said, “There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot.” Friends of Animals cannot.
Janis Carter, project director of the Chimpanzee Rehabilitation Project and FOA’s President, Priscilla Feral, greeting each other in The Gambia
FAMILY TIES COMPILED BY NICOLE RIVARD PHOTOGRAPHY BY JANE SEYMOUR
Janis Carter has dedicated her life to raising and protecting chimpanzees in West Africa, and she wouldn’t have it any other way
R
ecently Janis Carter’s sister reminded her that before she left for West Africa back in 1977, she shopped at stores like Saks Fifth Avenue and her clothes even matched. “I even had a pair of gorgeous mustard suede heels,” Carter said. But what she expected to be a three-week visit turned into a permanent stay, so she’s never had another need for such things. Her establishment of an open air sanctuary on three islands on the Gambia River for orphaned and captive-bred chimpanzees compelled her to choose a very different lifestyle, one where at the beginning, the chimps were let loose on the island, and Carter slept in a cage.
32 | Friends of Animals
In those early days, she helped the chimpanzees who arrived on the island become more fully themselves. She demonstrated which foods were safe, led foraging expeditions and communicated through chimp vocalizations. She wrote in Smithsonian Magazine in the 1980s: “I knew that if the chimps’ return to the wild was to be successful, I too would have to limit my contact with humans.” In 2005, that same magazine recognized her as one of 35 “Innovators of our time,” scientists, artists and scholars who enriched the magazine as well as people’s lives. Her tagline read: the primate who taught other primates how to survive in the world. The photo caption quoted her as saying: “The best hope is to forge a relationship between people and chimps living close to them.” Just three years after that article was printed, Friends of Animals began supporting Carter’s work in West Africa— officially called the Chimpanzee Rehabilitation Project— including providing $70,000 annually for supplemental food and vitamins and minerals for the chimpanzees who call the River Gambia National Park, also known as Baboon Islands, home. In a rare interview, Carter talked with Friends of Animals about the Chimpanzee Rehabilitation Project and how her chimpanzee family continues to inspire her.
For people unfamiliar with the Chimpanzee Rehabilitation Project, can you give a brief overview of the project? How many chimps did it begin with and how much has it grown? The protection and rehabilitation of captive chimpanzees was a focus of the Brewer family, who lived in The Gambia and cared for a variety of species of confiscated or unwanted wild animals. Eddie Brewer, originally a forestry officer, was The Gambia’s first director of wildlife. His daughter, Stella Brewer, released a group of chimpanzees confiscated in The Gambia in the Niokolo Koba National Park in Senegal. This pioneering work captured the interest of many people including Maury and Jane Temerlin who were the human parents of the famous sign language chimpanzee Lucy. The Temerlins had raised Lucy from a few days of age and loved and cared for her as their daughter. As Lucy matured and the human home could not provide for the needs of a growing chimpanzee, the Temerlins searched the world for a placement for Lucy that would allow her to realize her potential as a chimpanzee. Stella Brewer’s release program in Senegal was for them, at the time, the best and only option. Although fraught with real risks, if Lucy survived, her parents felt the gains could not be compared to the then current lifestyle faced by adult chimpanzees in captivity. I first met Lucy when I was in graduate school at the University of Oklahoma. One of my many part-time jobs was cleaning her cage several days a week. Lucy and I developed a friendship and one day her parents broke
the story to me that they were sending Lucy to Africa to be rehabilitated by Stella Brewer in Senegal. When Lucy and Marianne (her chimpanzee acquaintance) left for Africa, I accompanied them along with Lucy’s parents and her human brother Steve. For a variety of reasons, Lucy did not go to Senegal but stayed in The Gambia at the Abuko Nature Reserve for 18 months and I eventually released her on one of the islands in the River Gambia National Park in early 1979. From the time I arrived with Lucy in 1977 to her release on the island, several more chimpanzees in need of a home and family crossed our paths. By the time I started the release there were six of us … and very soon after 10. Only a few weeks earlier, Stella had decided to move her surviving group of eight chimpanzees from the Niokolo Koba to an island neighboring where I was in the process of releasing Lucy and her new friends. We functioned financially independently for several years before joining forces. Are there any individuals remaining from the original group released on the islands? From 1979 to 2002, 50 chimpanzees were released on the islands; 35 years later, 15 of those are still in residence. We now have a total population of 105 chimpanzees living in four family groups. At the end of 2014 we have had a total of 130 offspring born on the islands. Some families are on their third generations.
Below: One of the Baboon Islands
“I knew that if the chimps’ return to the wild was to be successful, I too would have to limit my contact with humans.”
Left: Rene on a boat ride to feed the animals on Baboon Island Above: Chimps eating fresh produce on Baboon Island
You were a grad student working with sign language chimps when you took on the task of accompanying two chimpanzees to Africa to be reintroduced into the wild on the islands of Gambia. You were supposed to be there for three weeks but you stayed and taught the chimps to be chimps, which was more difficult than anyone suspected. Now it’s 37 years later. What was the pivotal moment/moments for you or event that compelled you to stay once the chimps were ok? I don’t recall a specific moment in time when I made the decision to stay indefinitely in Africa. I initially left for Africa at the request of the Temerlins to accompany Lucy, as part of her emotional support system. I was her girlfriend and the Temerlins wanted her to feel we were all there for her – family and friends. I took a three-week leave of absence from my coursework and my teaching, but I had no earthly idea that I would stay longer than that and certainly if you had interviewed me at the time I would not have ever said I was staying longer or even that this is what I wanted to do for a career. My decision to stay was more of a gradual one made in stages of time of initially three-month periods, which originally coincided with some insignificant photocopy of a calendar that had three months on one page. After going
34 | Friends of Animals
through a few pages of the calendar I began to perceive my period of extension in years. Eventually the years’ beginnings and endings got kind of fuzzy, and I was really only aware of the passage of time by the seasons of wild fruits. I never really had a project plan with a start and end date. Several years into life on Baboon Island, I saw my job description as assisting the chimps in forming a cohesive social group and helping those in the group that had little or no experience to develop the essential skills of living in the wild. I learned from the wilder ones and the less wild ones learned from me. I always thought once I felt the chimps could handle life on their own I would move off the island and probably at that point leave Africa as my job would be over. At that point my very narrow perception was that their survival depended totally on their abilities to live a wild life. When I moved off the island and my world expanded to include people I realized the survival of these released chimpanzees depended a lot on the attitude of their human neighbors. And that was when I established our education program, which has grown over the years and become an important component of the overall rehabilitation program. During the years I lived alone with the chimps on the island and those following I was contacted by a number of organizations to help other chimpanzees in need of assis-
Janis’ headquarters in The Gambia
tance. Through these contacts I learned more about issues of conservation for wild chimpanzees in West Africa. Over the years I worked as a short-term consultant on a number of projects related to chimpanzee conservation in West Africa. I also established the chimpanzee sanctuary in Guinea with funding from the European Commission. Through all these efforts and travels The Gambia remained my base and the chimpanzees at Baboon Island my tap root of life and focus in Africa. After 37 years, what keeps you motivated on a daily basis? For instance, can you talk about a recent experience, perhaps a chimpanzee birth, or a conversation with a tourist visiting the River Gambia National Park, that made you feel excited about the work you do? All these questions have been tough ones, Nicole, because the answers require spanning decades of time as well as layers of emotional depth of my own life. It is difficult— after spending a lifetime here—to separate my own life from my work for the chimps. I kind of view it all as one entity now. And I obviously have ups and downs like everyone does. And I am sure there have been days that I just wanted to ride off into the sunset and never come back, but fortunately I don’t remember them. Probably my strongest motivator is that the chimps represent family to me. And keeping in regular touch with the development of their lives is an important part of my life. Sharing these developments with Rene and Bruno, the two men who have worked with the chimpanzees as long as I have, is especially rewarding and definitely heart-warming for me. My most favored moments of all are when I am in the boat with either Rene or Bruno and we are watching one of the chimpanzees do something particularly funny or startling. The event usually triggers a memory of the chimp’s parent or grandparent, which launches us into the past and we plunge into a rich session of vivid storytelling.
Toto, a chimp that Janis cared for after he was orphaned when his mother died from what appeared to be a snake bite.
Seeing specific chimpanzees that I raised during my earliest years in Africa is particularly motivating. Dash was my first young chimp that I raised, and my relationship with him differed greatly to my relationship with Lucy for example. Lucy and I were friends—equals—but Dash was like a son and for all the many chimps I raised or cared for over the years I think my inner smile was always the biggest when I saw Dash. When I moved off the island I always looked forward to seeing him from the boat and I always felt like he looked forward to seeing me. My motto back then was a day without seeing Dash was not a day worth living. Sadly, Dash passed away a few years ago. However, I have the fortune of seeing him in the faces and behaviors of his many sons and grandsons and this reminiscence allows me a moment of reflection of my long past and very close bond with Dash. Please consider making a donation to
Friends of Animals to support our work abroad.
Winter 2015-16 | 35
LETTERS FUR LOOK ALIKES ARE TRAGIC
SPAY/NEUTER ADS EFFECTIVE
DISGUSTED BY BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
I was happy and sad when fake fur came out. Happy because many nonhuman animals wouldn’t be murdered and sad because if you can’t tell it’s not real, it sends the wrong message. SUSU LEVY • SCOTTSDALE, ARIZ.
In your Summer, 2015 Action Line, I took note of your stunning, full-page ad, Keep Pets Off the Streets—Spay or Neuter. Are these available for sale as posters? They would be great for outreach events out here. ROBERT PENNEY • LAGUNA BEACH, CALIF.
BLM: Stands for Butchers of Lovely Mammals after reading the letter in Fall, 2015 Action Line, from Harry Koenig, Pueblo, Colo.—We agree! RW & J HOWARD • ESTES PARK, COLO.
WILDLIFE MISMANAGEMENT
Deer herds are purposely managed at high populations to satisfy a minority who find fun in killing, yet it’s at the expense of human lives lost because of the increased numbers of vehicle and deer collisions. We need neutral people in wildlife management, instead of pro-hunters. It’s the fox managing the chicken house the way it is now. HERMAN LENZ • SUMNER, IOWA
Editor’s Note: Robert thank you for your compliment. To help avert the perils of pet homelessness and draw attention to the financial commitments of rescuing an animal,we launched this billboard and print ad campaign to link cat and dog adoptions with our affordable spay-neuter program. The ads were created by the talented Atlanta-based Breensmith Advertising. We do not have the ads available as posters but recommend printing them on a color printer.
LET’S HEAR FROM YOU! MAIL US: Editor, Action Line Friends of Animals 777 Post Road Darien, CT 06820 E-MAIL US: contact@friendsofanimals.org
IN MEMORIAM Friends of Animals has received kind donations in memory of the following individuals:
ELIAN RUSSO
MARGARET STEIN
PEACHES
SUSAN L. WARD-VIGLIOTTE
THELMA HUNT
CHIVIS
LYNNE STARR-POST
CAROL ROMAN
SHADOW
ARISTINE LOUGEE
STANLEY MAHY
RIDLEY
BETTY R. O’DAY
YVONNE GARDNER
BUDDY
JAMES J. FLYNN, JR.
PHYLLIS M. BEAM
HOLLY
JOELLEN STEPHANS KEYES
SAMMY
CECIL (THE AFRICAN LION)
THERESA MARIE JARBOE
BESSIE
WHISKERS
36 | Friends of Animals
BY MEG MCINTIRE. ILLUSTRATION BY MARCUS PIERNO
CHEERS
JEERS ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS’ SHORTSIGHTEDNESS
QUEEN OF IVORY NABBED Cheers for the arrest of an ivorytrafficking mastermind, dubbed the “Queen of Ivory”, who was recently nabbed by authorities in Tanzania and charged with smuggling nearly 1.9 tons of ivory worth $2.7 million. Having reportedly confessed, she now faces 20-30 years behind bars. Businesswoman Yang Feng Clan, 66, is now thought to be the most notorious ivory trafficker brought to task in the war against elephant poaching. Unlike the neighboring state of Kenya, which abolished safari hunting decades ago, Tanzania allows trophy hunting, and that complicates anti-poaching efforts. Tanzania has been the ground zero of elephant poaching in East Africa for the past several years, having lost 85,000 elephants between 2009 and 2014, according to a recent elephant census in the country.
Jeers to the Army Corps of Engineers and its shortsighted plan to kill thousands of federally protected migratory birds in Oregon to supposedly keep them from eating endangered juvenile salmon and steelhead at the mouth of the Columbia River. This decision perfectly represents the entrenched shoot-first mentality of these agencies. Birds are meant to eat fish...it’s humans who are to blame for the devastation of marine life. We joined five conservation and animal welfare organizations in April and initiated a lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and USDA Wildlife Services to try and stop the slaughter of thousands of double-crested cormorants and find it unbelievable that despite strong public opposition, the Army Corps is going through with the killings. Since May the agency has killed 358 birds and oiled more than 5,000 nests to keep eggs from hatching and plans to kill thousands more using shotguns.
Call the U.S. Army Corps’ public affairs office at 503808-4510 and let them know you oppose cormorant killing. Contact Governor Brown’s office and tell her you want the State of Oregon to promote non-lethal solutions to salmon recovery 503-378-4582.
TEXAS SHUTTERS LAST DOG RACING PARK Cheers to the last remaining dog racing venue in Texas, called Gulf Greyhound Park, for announcing plans to shutter its track at the end of the year and send the dogs to adoption programs, bringing an end to what has been a long-running chapter of animal mistreatment in the state’s history. The Gulf Greyhound Park has featured greyhound racing since opening in 1992. It has long been considered one of the worst tracks for dogs in the United States. Between 2008 and 2014 alone, more than 2,300 greyhound injuries were reported. In that time, 108 greyhounds died or were euthanized. The closure in Texas now leaves only six states with operational tracks, including Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa and West Virginia. The closures and dwindling interest in this dying industry is a hopeful sign that more states will soon follow, as the commonly held notion of animals existing for entertainment purposes continues to be wiped out.
NEW MEXICO TAKES AIM AT COUGARS Jeers to the New Mexico Game Commission, which voted this summer to approve trapping for cougars on state trust land and private land throughout New Mexico. The commission also voted to increase bear-hunting quotas. Both decisions came without sufficient scientific evidence and in the face of overwhelming public opposition. More than 1,000 New Mexicans sent written comments and several hundred people came to a meeting to ask the Commission not to adopt New Mexico Game and Fish’s proposals, which may put bear populations in danger and would allow traps on private and state trust lands, where they could maim or kill not just cougars but other animals. FoA is adamant that wildlife officials should be educating the public on what to do when they encounter a black bear or a cougar in the wild. We also encourage people to tell their legislators.
Winter 2015-16 | 37
CROSS OUT T-SHIRT “There’s no right way to do the wrong thing” Navy 100% combed and ring-spun cotton T-shirt. Available in women’s sizes S, M, L, XL. Men’s sizes S, M, L, XL, XXL. Females should consider ordering up a size for great fit. $24 including shipping
YOU LOOK JUST AS STUPID WEARING THEIRS Clearance item. Long-sleeve jersey. Available in women’s sizes (100% cotton/runs small): S, M, XL. Men’s (90% cotton, 10% polyester) sizes: M, L, XL $12 inlcuding shipping
38 | Friends of Animals
BE VEGAN T-SHIRT Dark gray heathered high quality ring-spun cotton/polyester T-shirt. Available in women’s sizes S, M, L, XL. Men’s sizes S, M, L, XL, XXL. Females should consider ordering up a size for great fit.
VEGAN T-SHIRT Men’s and women’s 100% certified organic cotton black and white. Men’s and women’s sizes. S, M, L, XL. Artwork by Nash Hogan at Hand of Glory Tattoo, Brooklyn, NY
$24 including shipping
$22 including shipping
CATALOG ORDER FORM
SEND TO: Friends Of Animals, P.O. Box 150451 Hartford, Connecticut 06115-0451 PLEASE ALLOW 3–4 WEEKS FOR DELIVERY. Twenty-five percent of the total sale price of your purchase will help fund Friends of Animals’ programs.
NAME
ADDRESS
APARTMENT #
CITY
STATE
ZIP
QUANTITY ITEM DESCRIPTION
SIZE
My check or money order payable to Friends of Animals is enclosed Please charge my:
Visa
MasterCard
American Express
PHONE NUMBER OR EMAIL
PRICE EACH
TOTAL PRICE
TOTAL MERCHANDISE ORDER _________________
Discover
/
ACCOUNT NUMBER
EXPIRATION DATE
DONATION ENCLOSED _________________
TOTAL AMOUNT ENCLOSED _________________
SIGNATURE For your convenience, you may fax your credit card order to: 203–656–0267 or shop online at www.friendsofanimals.org.
THANK YOU!
Non-profit Org. US Postage P A I D Friends of Animals
777 Post Road • Darien, CT 06820 Postmaster: Leave with Current Resident
THE PERFECT HOLIDAY GIFT! This cookbook breaks ground with healthy dog treats guaranteed to make tails wag. With recipes made entirely from plants, dog owners can rest assured they are feeding their best friends safe treats instead of the scary commercial ones on the market. *Plus it’s the gift that keeps giving—all proceeds support Friends of Animals’ low-cost spay-neuter program for dogs and cats, plus other life-saving campaigns.
Cranberry Oatmeal Delight Biscuit! FOR THE LOVE OF DOG BISCUITS COOKBOOK This 7x7, 64 full-color page book features 12 beautifully illustrated recipes—one for each month, which contain seasonal, plant-based ingredients and complement the holidays. $12 plus $2 shipping. Add $3 for a 3-inch dog bone shaped cookie cutter