.bmp)
I really hate starting the blog with bad news. It was my intention to start a blog with a happy patriotic video as I am supposed to be celebrating Independence Day. I will not be celebrating anything this year as I learned Beast, a beautiful male liger whom I got to know rather well over the few short months we spent together, was "euthanized" last month.
Before I start my monologue, I'd like to share Beast with you:
Picture taken in January 2002, shortly after his arrival.
Picture taken March 2005
Pictures taken in August 2005
Picture taken in February 2009
So what happened to Beast?
(you may want to turn up your speakers up (way up) to hear the tour guide talking about Beast on the third and final slide of the presentation)
As soon as I learned Beast was near death and on display for the public to see in temperatures hoovering at or over 100 degrees, and not eating, I immediately contacted the USDA/APHIS.
By the time the inspectors showed up (10 days later), Beast was already dead.
As soon as I learned Beast had died, along with two more cougars, I contacted the USDA/APHIS inspector to let her know that Beast and the cougars were dead. I was surprised to learn the inspectors just visited the property on Wednesday (July 1, 2009), and other than a few housekeeping issues, they found no problems!
Trying to understand how the pseudo-sanctuary got away with displaying a very sick liger, not to mention 8 cougars that died within just six short months, I asked several important questions (questions and answers are not direct quotes as I am paraphrasing the questions and answers for brevity sake):
1. Is it against the AWA to display animals that are seriously ill and under distress? Answer: As long as the pseudo-sanctuary's veterinarian authorizes the animal to remain on display, then there is not much the USDA/APHIS can do.
2. How did Beast die? Answer: The paperwork on file, signed by the pseudo-sanctuary's veterinarian, claimed he was euthanized due to a positive result for cancer. The USDA/APHIS does not have the authority to challenge the vet's report unless it is proven the report was falsfied in some manner.
3. Did she happen to notice that two more cougars were also dead? Yes, the paperwork on file seemed in order.
4. What were their cause of deaths? Were autopsies performed? Let me guess, the results were "inconclusive." Answer: Vague answers were given, but the bottom line was the paperwork appeared to be in order.
5. Based on the high number of cougar deaths, the relocation of the remaining cougars to an older primate cage (which has a top), and news that pepper spray may be issued to the workers soon, is it possible that some of the cougars may have escaped? Answer: Well, I - anything is possible.
6. Did she see the New York primates? Answer: Yes, the primates were doing fine. Two primates appeared to have some hair loss, which probably occurred from over grooming by the dominant female (side note: I thought one of the tour guide said the hair loss was due to self-mutilation while housed in the small laboratory cage, hmmm). The redness was due to the female primates going through their estrous cycle. The redness can extend from their bottoms to their faces.
7. Did you see the bite wounds on the primates' bodies, specifically the tails? Answer: No, they were bouncing around so much I did not notice any bite wounds.
The inspector told me the USDA/APHIS cannot continue to go out and check on the pseudo-sanctuary's animals each time I report something wrong. She went on to say that this "sanctuary" was one of the better ones the USDA/APHIS inspects as they have very few write-ups. She then went on to describe a different sanctuary that suffered a loss when a male tiger, one night, killed its cage mate. The inspector told me there was nothing the owner could do to prevent this accident. (whaaaa???) What I should have said at this point was that the pseudo-sanctuary director in question puts too many animals together, which results in a lot of fights, and in the cougars' case, deaths. But I was just too stunned by this story to even comment other than "that's terrible" and "poor tiger."
I asked her "what about the high number of animal deaths?" Her response was straight to the point, as long as the deaths were humane and the paperwork was in order, there is not much the USDA/APHIS can do. I was encouraged to report any animals laying in the hot sun after sedation, so the animals could be checked upon by an inspector. I quipped, why bother, by the time the USDA/APHIS inspectors showed up, the animal would be dead but the paperwork would be in order. I asked the inspector if the same vet signed all the paperwork and was told yes; the pseudo-sanctuary only uses one vet. Interesting.
I further pressed the investigator by asking if 67+ dead animals since the start of the investigation seemed rather high to her. She agreed the number of animal deaths at the pseudo-sanctuary was rather high (and she felt the death rate was high for many years) and she even went so far as to say she questioned the pseudo-sanctuary's veterinarian about the high number of animal deaths a few years ago. She told me the vet probably doesn't like her very much (which I replied, "well, she doesn't like me at ALL") because of her of line of questioning. The most she got out of the vet was that if the animal was aggressive, then it must be put down [gee where have I heard that before?].
We agreed the the pseudo-sanctuary does not go to the ends of the earth to care for its animals. We talked about how much better care we give our own animals, which explains our pets long longevity. Our pets live to a ripe old age, while the sanctuary's animals are either euthanized or they have "renal failure." Question? How come very few animals living at the scamuary actually die from old age?
Unfortunately, unless I can prove the animals are killed inhumanely or slaughtered for their fur, bones, claws, etc., there really isn't anything the USDA/APHIS can do. After all, the paperwork IS in order. So, I concluded by saying that I won't take up the USDA/APHIS' valuable time in the future by requesting investigations into animal deaths or injuries; I'll just submit a report to the agency, so they can update their records. No sense in investigating animal injuries and/or deaths since the paperwork will undoubtedly be in order (I'm beginning to sound like a broken record, huh?).
So folks, that's how a sanctuary becomes a "scamuary." Oh, there is at least one bit of good news, the inspectors got to visit the unregulated, non-inspected property and she saw Jake, the White Crowned Mangabey, living in an enclosure about 20' long, nearby other non-human primates. Sadly, out of all the animals I expressed concerned for their health and well-being to the USDA/APHIS, only Jake and Bubba are still alive today. The really big question is how long will Beauty (the other liger) live -- I give her six months before the pseudo-sanctuary kills (oops, I meant "euthanize") her...with the proper paperwork on file, of course!
Oh, and I forgot to mention the bears are still living in their quarantine cages. Never mind over a $100,000 was donated to build their supposed huge "natural enclosure" back in 2004. Their dreams of trees, natural ground, and a large pond apparently are just that--dreams. I asked if the inspector noticed the clogged drain in the old bear enclosure or the broken water bowl in another bear's enclosure. The inspector said she did not see these problems. Funny, I was under the impression the workers reported, on the morning of the USDA/APHIS inspection, problems with the bears' enclosure. So much for a thorough "inspection."
More to follow on the cougar story...
And I have updated the primate story in the previous blog posting. Check out the videos at the end of the photos and you decide--are the primates get worse, or grouping well as the USDA/APHIS inspector claimed.
