How Could I Have Missed This?

After three years of reviewing the pseudo-sanctuary's 990 (tax returns), you would have thought I would have caught a very big problem listed on the 2006 and 2007 990 before this week:

2005 (Before the OAG reviewed the pseudo-sanctuary's financial accounts)

Gross receipts: $1,420,278

Total expenses: $1,362,208

Difference: +$17,026
2006

Gross receipts: $1,743,394
Total expenses: $1,791,157
Difference: -$52,093

2007

Gross receipts: $1,179,253
Total expenses: $1,475,882
Difference: -$310,920

Vet Care and Feed for over 500 hundred animals: 2006

Vet Care: $24,388
Feed: $58,200
Animal Care: $8,409

Total: $90,997

2006

Vet Care: $9,845
Feed: $96,274
Animal Care: $7,709

Total: $113,828

In comparison to the previous year, vet care declined significantly in 2007 by $14,543. Oh, and this just happens to be the year the directors gave themselves a +55% salary increase!

This is a horrible development because the pseudo-sanctuary is essentially living day to day, delaying payment of bills (no doubt accumulating late fees), and cutting animal care services, all because the directors have absolutely no clue as to how to operate within a budget.

Some of the pricey expenditures for 2007 include:
$5,018 - Employee Meeting (More beer parties?)

$9,355 - Cell Phones (Who is using the cell phones and are personal calls charged to the animals?)

$3,922 - IFAW Investigation (Doesn't IFAW have its own investigators and why is the pseudo-sanctuary spending the animals' money for another non-profit charity that takes in millions more than the pseudo-sanctuary????)

$11,383 - Rental Property (Why are the animals paying for one of the director's personal housing? See past posting dealing with the rental property subject to include the director's eventual eviction from the rental property)

$5,171 - Tools (Every year the pseudo sanctuary has to buy thousands of dollars of new tools. Sticky fingers??)

Some of the pricey expenditures for 2006 include:

$3,041 - Air Fare (To where?? You are under investigation--you should be on-site taking care of business instead of going to Las Vegas and New Orleans!)

$5,293 - Entertainment (Good grief! I can only imagine the type of "entertainment" that was purchased using the animals' funds)

$20,287 - Hotels (Wow!! This animals paid how much for hotels in 2006???)

$4,490 - Hotel Meetings (You have got to be kidding--more beer parties??)

$1,567 - Cabs/Tolls (Where in the world did the director go that required cabs and tolls?)

$5,687 - Office Contract Labor (Was this one of the directors' kid's salary?)

$12,640 - Rental Property (Animals paying the director's personal living expense -- nice)

$5,260 - Employee Meeting (Why does it cost so much to hold employee meetings on-site?)

$22,159 - Cell and Office Phone (Are you kidding me??? Hello? Who are you calling? Carol's relatives living in Europe?)

$5,053 – Tools (More tool replacement)

This is very disturbing news to say the least--especially since so many animals died from 2006-2008.

Sad News to Report

I received some very sad news today -- Satchimo, a 10-year old tiger (seen on the left) was recently diagnosed as having the early stages of renal failure. Chronic renal failure may have one or more causes--to include poor diet and dental disease. It is my understanding, the pseudo-sanctuary's big cats predominantly live on a "green chicken" diet. During hunting season, the facility usually receives some deer carcasses, but not enough to feed all the big cats at both facilities. Since the facility does not supplement the rotten chicken diet with vitamin and mineral supplements, the cats are at risk of malnutrition. Malnutrition can result in blindness, muscle wastage, and skeletal deformity. Essential minerals, such as calcium, vitamin A and E, should be added to the chicken, but due to cost, the pseudo-sanctuary elected not to give the supplements to the animals. Many of the pseudo-sanctuary tigers appear to have poor skeletal structure (bowed backs) and poor muscle tone as evident by the videos and pictures taken of the animals last year.

The sad news continues--Satchimo's cage mate, Sebastian (tiger on the right), died in December 2008 due to unknown causes. Zena, seen in the middle, is supposedly still alive, living at the unregulated, non-inspected property with Satchimo.

More sad news--this month a tour reported three tigers and one baby cougar missing from the touring property. Molly, a Bengal tiger, was not seen on tour. Molly arrived with her sister, Milly around 2001. Both tigers lived together until Milly died in 2004 allegedly from "renal failure."

Molly was then paired up with Zeus, since Zeus' cage mate, Sherrill, also allegedly died from "renal failure" on or about the same day Milly died. Now Molly is gone and Zeus lives alone. I am scared for Zeus.

On or about February 15, 2008, the pseudo-sanctuary acquired 3 Bengal tigers from Louisiana (2 tigers were acquired from 1 owner living in Jennings, LA and the third tiger was acquired from another owner living in a town near Jennings) named Java, Savannah, and Sabrina. According to the sanctuary's newsletter, Java was a 15-year old tiger and the two other female tigers were four years old. The newsletter claimed Savannah had cataracts and would require special care. There also appeared to be some concern the tigers may have been diabetic and therefore required medical testing.  Sadly, they will NEVER receive health care at the pseudo-sanctuary.

The January 2009 tour reported the Jennings tigers were no longer on tour. I pray they are alive and living at the non-regulated, non-inspected property.

As to the baby cougar, Noel--Noel was acquired in November 2008 at approximately 5-6 months of age. Since the pseudo-sanctuary was not prepared for the cougar, they placed her in an animal transporter and kept her in a building that was supposed to be torn down--at least until the City Building Inspectors arrived looking for the demolition permits (which the pseudo-sanctuary did not obtain and has thus far not received from the City). Past tours told me the building looked like it was in serious disrepair.

The December 2008 tour was told by the tour guide the cougar was living in this "building" and that the pseudo-sanctuary planned to build a special enclosure for the cougar, which would be placed in the cougar "compound" so the other 14 cougars would get to know her. Based on her small size, as seen in the local news cast, I could not believe the cougar would live for months in this small enclosure, until such a time the pseudo-sanctuary deemed the cougar ready for release into the main "compound!" Since many of these cougars have not taken well to new arrivals in the past, it was my opinion this wild-born cougar would not survive its introduction to the other big cats.

When the January 2009 tour asked where Noel was located (the first time), the tour guide responded that they planned to put the baby cougar directly in front of the adult lions and adjacent to the adult cougars. But, according to the tour guide, the pseudo-sanctuary changed its mind because she was too young! The tour guide did not disclose the cougar's whereabouts. So, later into the tour, the question was asked again, where was Noel? The tour guide refused to respond and simply continued on with the tour. So the question is--what happened to Noel?!?

This has truly been a sad day for everyone working on this case... I pray Sebastian is with our Heavenly Father at this time--and I pray everyone will know the truth about what happened to Savannah, Java, Sabrina, and Noel some day soon. These precious animals should not be forgotten.

Later:

This is truly a sad day as I just learned that Bam Bam, a bear living at the second property died today.  What is going on at this place?

Lord, please Bless Bam Bam's soul into Heaven forever and ever.  He was loved and he will not be forgotten.

Animal Welfare vs Animal Rights Groups

Ever since I became involved in the pseudo-sanctuary case, I learned there are two separate and distinct animal groups--animal welfare and animal rights. What's the difference between these two groups? Well, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, defines animal welfare groups as:

Animal welfare groups argue for greater protection for non-human animals, particularly those used by human beings in laboratories or in entertainment, as well as domestic animals such as those used for food, labour, or as companions (pets).

Unlike animal rights groups, animal welfare groups do not argue that animals should never be used, or kept as property, by human beings. Nor do any animal welfare groups advocate violence. These groups tend to seek legal, social and financial strategies.

The following is a list of animal welfare groups:

Animal Chaplains Animal Defenders International (ADI)Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF)Animal Protection Institute (API)American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA)Animal Welfare Institute (AWI)Anti-Cruelty Society (in Chicago in the US) ("to prevent cruelty to animals") British Divers Marine Life Rescue (BDMLR)Born Free Foundation The Blue Cross Cats Protection (formerly Cats Protection League)Christian Vegetarian Association (CVA)Compassion In World Farming (CIWF)Dogs Trust (formerly National Canine Defense League)Eurogroup for Animals International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) Kathmandu Animal Treatment Centre League Against Cruel Sports (previously also known as LACS)Marine Connection People's Dispensary for Sick Animals (PDSA)Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA)
Royal New Zealand Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RNZSPCA) Scottish SPCA (SSPCA) Society for Animal Protective Legislation (SAPL)Shark Trust WDCS (Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society)World Society for the Protection of Animals(WSPA)

According to Wikipedia, animal rights, also known as animal liberation, is the idea that the most basic interests of animals should be afforded the same consideration as the similar interests of human beings. Animal rights advocates approach the issue from different philosophical positions, but they agree that animals should no longer be regarded as property, or used as food, clothing, research subjects, or entertainment, but should instead be viewed as legal persons and members of the moral community.

Examples of animal rights groups:

Animal Aid (UK)Animal Defense League (ADL)Animal Liberation Leagues
Animal Liberation Press Office
Animal liberty

Anonymous for Animal Rights
Center on Animal Liberation Affairs (CALA)The Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade (CAFT)Compassion Over Killing (COK)Friends of Animals (FoA)The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)In Defense of Animals (IDA)People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)Sea Shepherd Conservation Society Southern Animal Rights Coalition (SARC) Uncaged Campaigns Vegan Society
Vegetarians' International Voice for Animals (Viva!)Western Animal Rights Network (WARN)

The pseudo-sanctuary pretends to be an "animal rights" advocate, but the truth be known, the directors eat meat and possess items made from leather. They see the sanctuary's animals as their property and treat them as such. The board of directors is more interested in protecting the "business" than protecting the animals, which definitely excludes them from being an animal welfare facility. Like other large animal rights (AR) groups, the pseudo-sanctuary believes no one should own an exotic wild animal--except for its self, of course--after all, they have to protect their business!

You may recall the pseudo-sanctuary claimed the facility was in dire straights due to financial problems. And yet, the facility claimed in December 2008, that it took in 18 exotic animals (to include tigers), 40 primates, 50 domestic cats and around 40 feral cats.

From what I have been able to gather, the pseudo-sanctuary charges former owners about $3500 per primate and $75 per cat for "life long care." Sadly, the previous owners of the animals have no idea what happened to their animals, for when inquiries are made, the pseudo-sanctuary directors would claim the animals are doing well and thriving or in the case of former cat owners, the cat has been adopted out to a "good home"--even in some cases when the pseudo-sanctuary knew the animals were dead.

A responsible animal welfare organization would not take in MORE animals during a time of financial crisis. Instead, it would focus on improving its financial situation for the benefit of the animals, making sure there was enough money for important things like, I don't know, food, clean water, and vet care!

So, next time you hear a story about an animal sanctuary on TV, print, or radio, ask yourself, is this animal rights organization or an animal welfare organization. Do your homework. Ask questions. Believe me, there is a difference between the two groups. And in the case of the pseudo-sanctuary, it may not belong to either group!

This is Just Plain Crazy

There are days when I just want to SCREAM!!! Today is one of those days [as I quietly scream inside as I type this entry]

In 2006, I contacted a person who ran a small animal rights group, hoping this person could help me with the pseudo-sanctuary animal case. For the first three months, this person (known hence forth as "AR") put me in contact with a lot of individuals, willing to listen to my story. I have to admit, in the beginning it was great--finally there were people willing to listen to my story. Progress was being made.

When I received word that one of the pseudo-sanctuary's chimps was mortally wounded during that same year, I contacted AR and we tried to connect with the USDA, in an attempt to get someone at the USDA to listen to our story. Unfortunately, by the time the USDA investigator checked on the primate, the chimp was already dead. AR kept in contact with me on and off again--mainly off for the last 1 1/2 years.

For the last three years, I have slept, ate, and worked this case until the wee hours of the morning. I have worked with a lot of people--like minded individuals--interested in seeing the pseudo-sanctuary's animals receive the proper care they so richly deserve. It has been, and will always be, a team effort.

Or so I thought until today. AR called me last week and expressed interest in an article found on an on-line newspaper. I gave AR a brief run down of the story, not thinking that what I said would go any further. Surprise! I was wrong... (my first mistake)

Today, the on-line newspaper did a follow-up of the original story, but instead of putting out the 2007 990 financial information as mentioned in the previous teaser post (which would have shown how much the pseudo-sanctuary "directors" made in 2007), I found a letter submitted by AR.

Okay, this was a shock. AR claimed it "recently uncovered information" regarding the six primates from Lehman College (AR claimed the primates came from New York University) sent to the pseudo-sanctuary. AR also claimed for the last 2 1/2 years the group worked "tirelessly" to expose violations at the pseudo-sanctuary. [I'm taking a deep breath at this point.]

AR never "exposed" this primate case--heck, AR would never have known about the details of the case without contacting me! AR also wrote PETA wanted to be kept in the loop regarding this case and that AR "kept PETA well informed" of the animal issues. What??? Since when????

AR originally sent me a draft of what I thought would be a statement sent to just the AR group (after just reading the e-mail, I noticed that the on-line newspaper did indeed received a copy of what appears now appears to be a "first draft" sent to the editor). Thinking that this posting only went to the group, I wasn't too worried about the article. Over the last several months (under a pseudo name) I noticed very few people ever comment on the group's postings as it appears to be geared towards dog and cat rescues. While I did not agree with everything AR wrote in the original article, I honestly did not think it would go very far. I had no idea AR would "modify" [think embellishment] the letter and then send copies of it to the on-line newspaper editor! (my second mistake)

AR never told me the article would show up on the Internet [think Zen thoughts] and now I have people asking me if the case has been damaged based on this open letter on the Internet.

All I can say is...

[screaming silently again because this is all just plain crazy]

Finger Pointing Has Begun

The PETA primate controversy heated up this week. On the one hand, you have PETA denying having anything to do with the placement of the animals at the pseudo-sanctuary and on the other other hand, you have the a college faculty member stating PETA helped them placed the animals at the facility. Hmmm. Whom to believe?

A local on-line newspaper printed the PETA story and boy did it catch the attention of PETA, the college, and the pseudo-sanctuary. Fearing the worse, the college faculty contacted the pseudo-sanctuary.

But, before they made contact with the pseudo-sanctuary, the faculty finally did a little homework and discovered a web site which posts legal documents that are a matter of record with the Texas OAG and the USDA/APHIS on its site--all pertaining to the pseudo-sanctuary. This web site, which advocates responsible exotic wild animal ownership, was the only one willing to step up to the plate in an effort to save future animals from being sent to the pseudo-sanctuary. This site was willing to share the truth with the public, including AR (animal rights) and AW (animal welfare) advocates, regarding the financial, legal, and animal issues pending before the Federal and State government agencies.

Now this is where things get a little dicey. One of the AR college representatives (a person who raised the laboratory primates in question), after reviewing the website, declared it "not authentic since they were for exotic pet owners."

Despite the USDA and OAG documents.

Despite the photographs.

Despite the videos.

So while this animal caretaker apparently has a problem with animals raised in a responsible and loving manner with private owners, she doesn't have a problem with animals living in small laboratory cages from birth to adulthood! The irony of it all...

The faculty "animal caretaker" decided they would rather "shoot the messenger" rather than learn from the material posted on the site--WOW!

Either this person is in total denial or she was afraid if she says anything negative against the pseudo-sanctuary, something might happen to the primates which she helped raised in the laboratory. I am not sure which scenario to believe. Either way, the AR folks did not do their homework when selecting the pseudo-sanctuary as the primates' new home. PETA and the college faculty just wanted to get the "monkeys off their backs," and now the animals are paying for their selfish and ignorant behavior.

Oh, and now I hear the pseudo-sanctuary wants to silence the AW website because of all the material on its site. Gee, I wonder why?

It's a Start of Another New Year...

The following quote was taken from PETA's 2008 Victories web page:


2008 - Monkeys Escape Brain Experiments

When PETA learned that six monkeys at New York's Lehman College who were slated for retirement at a sanctuary were instead sold to New York University (NYU) for invasive brain experiments, PETA contacted both Lehman and NYU and mobilized its members with an online action alert. After hearing from thousands of concerned people, NYU announced that it was sending the monkeys to a sanctuary. Wanda, Holly, Jada, Sophie, Samantha, and Lilly are now living together in a group at the sanctuary and will soon be introduced to the other monkeys at the facility.

http://www.peta.org/about/victories_date.asp?page=3&selected_year=2008

Photo obtained from: Victory! Reprieve for NYU Monkeys website: http://blog.peta.org/archives/animal_testing/

Several months ago, we learned Wanda, Holly, Jada, Sophie, Samantha, and Lilly were transferred from NYU to the pseudo-sanctuary in March 2008. We have reason to believe four additional rhesus macaques, Bugs, Sebastian, Prudence, and Miss Banana (B.) Peel, accompanied or arrived about the same time as the six macaques.  Attempts were made to contact PETA and former animal caretakers to find out what was promised to the animals and to give both groups an update on the primates' current conditions.

I finally received a response from PETA this month. PETA claimed they "had nothing to do with choosing placement for these monkeys. Lehman sold them to NYU for use in invasive brain surgery experiments. Lehman had previously promised that the monkeys would be placed in sanctuary so PETA approached both Lehman and NYU and asked them to abide by the experimental protocol and retire the monkeys. NYU chose the sanctuary without consulting PETA. PETA did not contribute money. We don't know how much NYU/Lehman provided. Again, the agreement was not with PETA, but we were told that the monkeys would be placed together in a large enclosure."

Don't you just love it... PETA claimed "victory" for saving the monkeys from NYU, but never bothered to check on where the animals were retired?? Does anyone believe PETA's claim that they had nothing to do with the animals' placement? Assuming PETA even bothered to check on the animals' destination, one would have thought they would have raised a red flag against this relocation. Instead, "victory" was claimed, everyone applauded PETA's actions, and then monkeys were quickly forgotten. No one bothered to go out and check on the primates after their relocation. PETA reported on its blog site the monkeys were to live out their lives at a primate sanctuary when the experiments were completed and reportedly set aside $40,000 for their retirement.

So how was the money that was set aside for the primates, spent? Where are the primates now? Well, Wanda, Holly, Jada, Sophie, Samantha, and Lilly can be seen on tour--not living in a large natural enclosure, but instead in a cage that used to house 2 chimpanzees, a small bear, a yellow-spotted leopard, patas monkeys, a grey languar, and baboons (the well used cage pictured right). If you look real close, you will see a dog bone in the back portion of the cage. I guess dog bones are the latest "enrichment" toys for primates.

So what happened to Bugs, Sebastian, Prudence, and Miss Banana (B.) Peel? Well, in June 2008, the four primates were sedated (Ketamine) by the workers (no vet on hand) and placed into a new enclosure located on the unregulated, non-inspected property. The workers claimed they sedated and moved the primates into their new enclosure in the morning before the temperature soared into the 100's. The workers left the primates to tend to the other animals, and when they returned, three of the primates were found laying in the hot sun, dying. Instead of calling the veterinarian, the workers tried to revive the monkeys themselves, but failed. Two monkeys died that day, and one monkey was allowed to suffer overnight until she finally died the next morning. Only one primate survived the "transfer," and that primate's name was Bugs. Today, I have no idea what happened to Bugs. Since the facility has a policy not to house animals singularly, there is a strong possibility Bugs was killed as well.

From what I understand, the Talley Road animal caretakers have a history of killing macaques  by "accidentally" over sedating the animals as the workers could not accurately determine the monkeys' weight based on sight alone.  And the baboon sedation?  Well, baboons have different sedation requirements for each species (ie. type of drugs used and dosage).  If the animal caretakers used the wrong drugs or dosage on a particular baboon species (ex:  Hamadryas or Olive), then chances are the animals were killed due improper use of drugs. 

And if the animal caretakers are self-medicating/treating injured animals or sedating the pseudo-sanctuary animals without the assistance from a vet, isn't that practicing veterinarian medicine without a license??

Here's the proof the animal caretakers do not want you to see:

MM Allowed Monkeys to Die - 062208

So what happened to Bugs?

MM Allowed Monkeys to Die - 091708

So, congratulations to PETA for their "victory!" Once again, animals were exploited for the purpose of raising money for its organization with absolutely no concern for the health and welfare of the animals they tried to "rescue." Since the six primates living at the touring property live in a transitory cage, I'm sure it won't be long before they disappear to the unregulated, non-inspected property. Then God help them from the tender loving care of sanctuary's animal caretakers.

[Present Day: Bugs was not listed on the WAO's Animal Inventory listing made available to the public as the sanctuary looked relocating its animals due to the sanctuary's closing. Date of the listing was August 23, 2010. It is then fair to assume that Bugs is dead.  Way to go, PETA.
.