Farewell To Beast - A Very Special Liger

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.

Before and After - The NY Primate Story

On January 1, 2009, I reported how PETA was instrumental in relocating the New York primates to Texas (refer back to January 1, 2009 posting). The primates arrived over a year ago, yet the pseudo-sanctuary continues to report the primates only arrived "recently."

Below are photographic progression of what the primates looked like:
In the New York lab

In January 2009 (shortly after primates were
placed on display after remaining in quarantine
for approximately 9 months)

In February 2009



In May 2009



In June 2009

If you click on the photos above, you can see the extent of the primates' hair loss and one primate had an open wound on the base of her tail. Sadly, the tour guides continue to claim the primates arrived in poor condition from the New York laboratory and it appears the primates' health continues to deteriorates. The USDA was apprised of the primates condition in May and June 2009 - thus far no action has been taken to help these animals. Even their former owners, Lehman College, and PETA have turned their backs on these animals. This is no success story.

Listen to two separation explanations as to what happened to the primates, by two different tour guides:

[Present Day:  When I contacted PETA and asked why in the world would anyone from PETA send primates to the WAO, I received this response to my inquiry:]

From: Lisa Wathne

To: Kristina Brunner
Sent: Wed, December 31, 2008 11:26:48 AM
Subject: RE: ASUS/WAO - Lehman College Primates


Hi Kristina,


PETA had nothing to do with choosing placement for these monkeys. Please see answers to your specific questions in blue below.


Lisa Wathne


Captive Exotic Animal Specialist
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
peta.org


________________________________________


From: Kristina Brunner
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 5:24 PM
To: Lisa Wathne
Subject: ASUS/WAO - Lehman College Primates

Greetings Lisa:


I don't know if you remember me--I contacted you in February 2006 regarding the Animal Sanctuary of the United States , dba The Wild Animal Orphanage. You will be pleased to know the case against the ASUS/WAO is on-going by the Texas Office of the Attorney General and the USDA/APHIS and both cases are entering their 3rd year. At this time, an APHIS administrative hearing is pending for violations of the AWA.


The bad news: I recently learned PETA sent the Lehman College rhesus macaques to the ASUS/WAO in March 2008:

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.


POC: Kathy Guillermo, Director Laboratory Investigations Department

http://www.peta.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2008/03/28/victory-reprieve-for-nyu-monkeys.aspx

I have to admit dismay that PETA elected to send the primates to this facility--especially since it has been under investigation by State and Federal agencies since February 2006.


Regardless, what's done, is done. I have pictures of the primates' new enclosure (a small enclosure which used to house, at one time or another, 2 chimps, a baby bear, a leopard, tiger cubs, a grey langur, baboons, pata monkeys, and now rhesus macaques). The primates are on tour at the Leslie Road facility and they live right next to the tigers. It has been over 8 months since their arrival to the WAO and as far as I know, there are no plans to "integrate" the primates with other rhesus macaques at the Talley Road facility (non-regulated, non-inspected property--USDA was denied access to inspect the property in 2007.)

1. How much money did the WAO receive from Lehman College and PETA for the care of the primates? PETA had nothing to do with choosing a sanctuary for these monkeys. Lehman sold them to NYU for use in invasive brain 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.


2. What were the primates promised (i.e. a new large natural enclosure, special care, special diet)? Is there anything in writing describing their proposed or actual care/facility (emails, letters, etc)? Again, the agreement was not with PETA, but we were told that the monkeys would be placed together in a large enclosure.


3. Did the following 4 rhesus macaques accompany the six rhesus macaques from New York-- Sebastian (adult male); Prudence (adult female); Miss B. Peel (adult female); and Bugs (adult male)? If yes, how much money accompanied these animals and were any special "promises" made towards their care and upkeep? We don’t know anything about these monkeys.


4. Why did PETA select the WAO as the animals' new caretakers? See above.


It is very important I speak to someone regarding the primates mention in question #3. I have information regarding the health of the rhesus macaques, which I believe PETA will find of interest.


Please feel free to respond by return e-mail or call me at (xxx) xxx-xxxx (nighttime only). Thank you for your assistance in this matter -


Kindest Regards,

Kristina Brunner
Former ASUS/WAO Vice President, Treasurer, and Chairperson

________________________________________

PETA may not have selected the WAO for the macaques, but they did not stop Lehman College from sending the monkeys to the Texas sanctuary.  If they stopped the monks from going to NYU, why couldn't PETA mobilized its base once again and stop the transfer to the WAO?

Sadly, PETA was not interested in following up the the monkeys listed in Item 3.  Big surprise.

Needless to say, the San Antonio Lightning was interested in this story:

Carol

USDA Caves Under Pressure

A lot has happened in the last few days--so needless to say I'm bursting with news. First off, the USDA and the pseudo-sanctuary entered into an agreement, which was good for the pseudo-sanctuary, but not so good for the animals. In 2007, the original settlement agreement, which the pseudo-sanctuary refused to acknowledge, let alone pay the $5k fine, was reduced from four charges to one charge. The fine was kept at $5k but now the sanctuary may apply the fine towards a new perimeter fence around the 112+ acre non-regulated, non-inspected property. They have 90 days to build this fence and 90 days to apply for a USDA exhibitor permit. Cost for the fence may run $60-70k (material and labor) and since the pseudo-sanctuary does not have the funds to pay for this fence, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to guess where the money will come from...the animals' feed and care monies of course (what little there is right now).

The pseudo-sanctuary also got the USDA to agree that any "no-notice inspections" will be conducted Tuesday-Sunday during their "normal business hours!" Needless to say, there was a lot of high fiving and back slapping going on at the pseudo-sanctuary because (1) they got the USDA to remove any charges relating to poor animal care from the Settlement Agreement and (2) they got the USDA to agree that when an inspector shows up for a "no-notice" inspection," the inspector must first report to the licensed property and then will be "escorted" by either the male or female director to the soon-to-be licensed property! Since this property is about 20 minutes away, and knowing the directors, they will stretch out the "escorting" time to about 30 or 40 minutes, that gives the workers at the second site plenty of time for "clean-up." What an absolute JOKE!!!

Read it for yourself!

The first Settlement Agreement with four (4) citations against the sanctuary:

1 - click here to enlarge 

Then the second "revised" settlement agreement:

2 - click here to enlarge 

 And then the third and final "revision":

3

How can the USDA reduce the "charges" against the sanctuary?  They went from four citations to one citation and removed all mention of animal-related offense!!   Where is justice for all the primates that froze to death at this place?

And now additional proof that the USDA bent over backwards for the board of directors:

Email - click here to enlarge 

Oh and there's more--on top of all the craziness, I learned the pseudo-sanctuary hired a 19 year old kid as their CPA accountant. The OAG wanted a CPA accountant to update and review the books on-site daily and to help the sanctuary's current CPA. As far as I can tell, this kid has no accounting experience, let alone certified, but that doesn't stop the pseudo-sanctuary from telling the OAG that they have complied with their wishes... Oh, and they have hired three individuals with criminal records (drugs and alcohol) to work around the animals (cleaning/construction). This just gets worse and worse.

Meanwhile a tour went in this weekend and discovered the NY primates appeared to be in worse condition than last seen in May 2009. The tour guide told tours the primates arrived in their horrible state and that they were nurturing them back to health! What a complete crock! The primates arrived in excellent condition, but geez, we cannot let the public know that, now can we? So the lies continue.

The 8 cougars (as counted in May 2009) were no longer living in the large natural enclosure, now they live in a monkey enclosure (much smaller enclosure than they are used to), not seen on the tour. There is no way to know how many are left since the tour guide refused to disclose the number of cougars living in the back cage. My guess either the cougars were escaping from their large (uncovered) enclosure, contracted a horrible disease, or were poisoned. Either scenario would account for their diminished numbers.

The male liger was reported very ill -- he was sedated in the hot sun (near 100 degrees) last Friday and two days later the tour guide reported he was "stilling recovering" from the drugs that were used to knock him out. He looked terrible. With temps at 100 degrees for the last four days, I am seriously concerned for his welfare -- so much for post-op care!

Bubba still looks incredibly thin. The tour was told Bubba was taken to A&M Vet School for a consultation. The tour guide said A&M looked at scheduling him for surgery, but it was determined no surgery would help him. The tour guide said he was sent to A&M due to his weight loss. It makes one wonder what really happened at A&M and did the pseudo-sanctuary deny him treatment due to cost? Inquiring minds want to know!

A female white tiger is suffering from a severe case of fluid build-up. The pictures were horrifying -- where is the so-called vet? Also, the wolf pup seen on tour in May 2009 was not seen on the recent tour, along with another tiger, and the tortoises. What a surprise.

The USDA was apprised of the situation -- now it's a wait and see situation. As soon as I have more time, I will provide additional details regarding the bursting news.

Oh, here is my email to the USDA expressing my profound disappointment in this agency:

From: Kristina Brunner
To: Robert.M.Gibbens@aphis.usda.gov
Cc: james.anthony@oag.state.tx.us ; Chris Krhovjak
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 8:26 PM

Subject: Re: ASUS/WAO Settlement Agreement 2009

VIA E-MAIL: TO: Robert.M.Gibbens@usda.gov

CC: james.anthony@oag.state.tx.us
christopher.krhovjak@oag.state.tx.us

Dear Dr. Gibbens:

I am profoundly disappointed in the USDA/APHIS' investigation into the ASUS/WAO. I just learned Ms. Asvestas and other interested parties are celebrating tonight because:

Ms. Asvestas got you to agree that "unannounced" inspectors will have to report to Leslie Road property first prior to be "escorted" to the Talley Road property from Tuesday-Sunday, 9:00am - 4:30pm; and that

Mr. Turton worked diligently to make sure "no violations regarding animal care" were listed in the Settlement Agreement. They are really excited about this point because they wanted to show no animals died due to their negligence, thereby dispelling any allegations/citations made that the primates were not provided heat during freezing temperatures resulting in the animals' death. This also allows them to continue to take in animals for money without any warnings given to the public (i.e. private animal owners/universities/colleges, etc) regarding the ASUS/WAO's past animal care history.

Just for the record, there are animal caretakers at the Talley Road facility, Monday-Sunday, and all animal caretakers have cell phones, so they can remain in contact with the ASUS/WAO's office. These cell phones (NEXTEL) are paid for by the ASUS/WAO and could have easily been added to the ASUS/WAO's Exhibitor application, thereby eliminating the need for the "unannounced" inspector to be "escorted" from the Leslie Road property to the Talley Road property (approximately 20 minutes apart). Needless to say, the "escort" time delay may allow certain "clean-up efforts" to be conducted prior to an AWA "inspection."

Here is the Talley Road employee work schedule:

Micheal Dereadt
Monday – Leslie - 9:00 am-12:30 pm
Talley - 1:00pm - 5:00pm
Wednesday – Talley 9:00 - 5:00pm
Thursday – Talley 9:00 - 5:00pm

Mary & Michelle Reininger
Monday - Talley Road - Off (both employees)
Tuesday - Talley Road - 9am - 5pm
Wednesday - Talley Road - 9am-5pm (one employee has off)
Thursday - Talley Road - 9am-5pm (one employee has off)
Friday - Sunday - 9:00am - 5:00pm

I cannot understand how you can allow the ASUS/WAO to dictate to your Agency as to where and when inspectors can report to investigate alleged animal welfare violations or even just conduct a routine inspection. Sadly, by removing the "9CFR 3.78(a) "Outdoor Housing Facilities" (Housed non human primates that were not acclimated to the temperature and humidity during winter months in outdoor facilities) from the original Settlement Agreement (in which the payment request date was March 7, 2007), you have condoned the ASUS/WAO's willful negligence and violation of the Animal Welfare Act, whereas numerous primates lost their lives in a cruel, yet preventable, manner. It is my understanding the ASUS/WAO has shown no remorse in the animals' deaths and as reported last month via email, animal deaths continue to rise at this facility. With over 81 animal deaths reported (not including domestic and hoof stock animals) from January 2006 - May 2009, I cannot understand why this facility is allowed to continue to operate.

Absolutely dismayed and saddened,

Kristina Brunner

----- Original Message -----

From: Robert.M.Gibbens@aphis.usda.gov
To: Kristina Brunner
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 12:31 PM
Subject: Re: ASUS/WAO Settlement Agreement 2009

Ms. Brunner:

I am unable to discuss any settlement negotiations that may be taking place with WAO. In regards to settlement agreements in general, I can tell you that if the facility fails to comply with any part of an agreement, then that agreement is voided. With regard to any licensee that refuses to allow unannounced inspections, we have and will continue to pursue enforcement action in those situations. Dr. Pannill will be looking into the concerns mentioned in the last paragraph of your email (below) during her next inspection.

Robert M. Gibbens, DVM
Director, Western Region
USDA, APHIS, Animal Care
2150 Centre Ave., Bldg B
Ft. Collins, CO 80526
(970)494-7478

"Kristina Brunner"

06/16/2009 10:40 AM To , "Robert M. Gibbens"

cc

Subject ASUS/WAO Settlement Agreement 2009

Dear Dr. Gibbens:

It has been brought to my attention the USDA/APHIS may have entered or plans to enter into a contractual agreement waiving enforcement proceedings against the ASUS/WAO for its AWA non-compliance, in exchange for certain concessions.

It has also been brought to my attention the USDA/APHIS may drop several citations from the original Settlement Agreement issued in 2007. If one of the citations dropped is related to the “outdoor housing facilities,” then I must strongly protest. These primates died a very slow death in 2005; they froze in their very tiny squeeze-back cages, while the staff and directors, in the comfort of the ASUS/WAO’s heated office building, did absolutely nothing to save these animals. The staff knew there was an impending freeze and despite my pleas to protect the primates from bone-chilling temperatures and gusting winds, the Asvestas turned their backs on these animals and allowed them to die. Their deaths must not be in vain.

In regards to the concessions, it is my understanding the ASUS/WAO may be allowed to offset the fine levied against the organization, so it can build a perimeter fence for the Talley Road property. It is also my understanding the ASUS/WAO will be allowed to submit a request to your Agency to add the Talley Road property to its current AWA license.

My concerns are:

1. The ASUS/WAO will not be able to afford the cost of a perimeter fence encompassing its 112-acre property—there is no way the facility can build a perimeter fence for just over $5,000. Right now the ASUS/WAO is experiencing financial difficulties. Donations are at an all time low and the directors are spending more money to get tourist to visit the property (brochures, pamphlets) and not organizing local fund raising events to cover its current bills. The board learned this month that the facility only has $179,000 in checking and $200,000 in savings—the exact same amount of a large donation the organization received last month. With several bills totaling over $150,000 overdue (60-90 days) for newsletter production and postage, a large land mortgage bill due by March 1, 2010 totally over $112,000 (a one-year extension was granted a few months ago), a $9,000 overdue vet bill from last year, plus other operational bills (feed, monthly domestic cat transports, salaries, etc); I do not see how the facility can afford to build a perimeter fence that will comply with AWA standards, either this year or next year. Will the USDA/APHIS mandate a timeframe as to when the fence must be built? If not, I believe the ASUS/WAO is buying time until they can close the Leslie Road facility and drop its USDA permit;

2. ASUS/WAO made it publicly known they wish to close the Leslie Road facility and move all the animals to Talley Road. Once this new Settlement Agreement goes into affect, what will stop the ASUS/WAO from dropping its exhibitor’s license after just a few months—especially since it will take a lot of money and time to get the facility up to AWA standards?

3. While I applaud the USDA/APHIS in its attempt to gain access to the Talley Road facility, I can assure you Ms. Asvestas will not allow “unannounced” visits to the Talley Road facility. I have no doubt Ms. Asvestas will demand the USDA provide notice of any impending visits and for the inspector to report to Leslie Road property first, prior to being escorted by either herself or Ronald Asvestas to the Talley Road facility. My guess is she will claim that the Talley Road property is a “closed facility” which houses bio-safety level 2 animals and therefore no one is allowed on the property without advance notice and an escort. The “advance notice” and delay in “escorting” the inspector will allow the animal caretakers and other staff members to conduct certain clean-up efforts.

On the plus side, if your Agency can gain access to the property, your staff will be in the position of checking on Sabu (lion reported dead 2008); Jake (white crowned mangaby reported alive in 2008); two Louisiana tigers (taken to Talley in 2008); Jinx (lioness taken to Talley); Noel (reported alive 2009 with alleged injuries to the cougar’s left rear leg resulting from her “introduction” to the cougars at Leslie Road property—she is still on the mend); Lexus (white Arctic Fox taken to Talley this year); and so forth.

Once the ASUS/WAO applies for an AWA exhibitor’s license, you may want to conduct an unannounced visit and look for the following problems: quarantine cages with damaged door hinges; primate cages with broken welds and lexits; baboons breeding (babies born this year); ground holes in the wolf and leopard cages left unfilled in some places; missing shelter roofs in the tiger enclosures; shelter boxes need to be rebuilt in the tiger areas; the meat freezer not always working property; mid-walls in the New Jersey tiger enclosures damaged due to the constant fighting between tigers (tiger injuries have been noted but not reported to vet); the baboon building drain continually clogs up; tiger water bowls are malfunctioning; dead animal bodies contained in the HIV chimp building stored for pickup—ASUS/WAO orders roll off dumpsters from Allied Waste on an as needed basis; broken baboon welds; “old” bears; in-between wall requires welding; South Dakota tigers’ enclosures have broken welds on mid wall; water bowels need fixing or replacing; farrier required for the care of hoof stock animals (especially “Elmer”); and so forth.

In the meantime, I have not received word from your Office as to whether or not anyone plans to investigate the six dead cougars (all died within a few months this year), the six New York primates urinating blood, and the missing two tigers. Will anyone check on these animals, or will they fall victim to politics? With the surface temperatures in the 100s (with heat index exceeding 103 degrees), I am concerned there may be more deaths at the Leslie Road facility, therefore I formally requesting an investigation into the dead, sick, and missing animals. No doubt the facility’s animal manifest will need to be adjusted once again – question is, will the manifest be found at the main office (as required by law), or will it be found at the Asvestas’ personal residence? Thank you for your attention to this most pressing issue.

Kindest Regards,
Kristina Brunner