Animal Politics

For years I have been aware of how animals are used in politics. There are three main factions – those who believe only sanctuaries should be allowed to possess exotic wild animals; those who believe responsible owners should be allowed to possess exotic wild animals; and then there a group that does not support the ownership of exotics at all (not for private owners or sanctuaries).

Most people are not aware of these warring factions. And God forbid if you are caught consorting with the "enemy," for you will be cut-off from any support.

There are a lot of emotions and MONEY behind the controversial subject of “exotic ownership.” I have tried my best to stay out of the way of politics; simply because saving the WAO animals should NOT be a political subject. It should be about what is right and wrong. Legal vs. illegal. Moral values vs. chaos.

But, like most things in life, what I believe really does not matter in the grand scheme of things. Politics have taken over this case and now everyone is trying to “cover their royal asses.” The USDA FINALLY wrote-up the WAO for issues that plagued the facility for YEARS. The OAG is FINALLY getting off their collective asses and doing more than simply “monitoring the situation.” Why, because in July 2010, there was no food for the primates or the big cats. And it has become quite apparent that the current board of directors has no idea on how to raise funds for the animals—they have simply given up the ghost.

So, this meant either the OAG or the USDA had to take action and responsibility for the animals, which I believe the Cryers intended all along. It would not surprise me if the representatives for both offices were in the back room together flipping a coin to see who would be the one to take ownership of this mess.

What’s even more interesting is the various animal groups, whom I first contacted for help years ago, suddenly want to “help” the WAO animals today. Where were these same groups when I needed their help 4 ½ years ago? Hmm?? Hmm?

Case in point:

Last week I was contacted by Don Elroy, who used to work for a Texas sanctuary. In 2006, I was directed to speak with Mr. Elroy regarding the situation at the WAO. I needed help with finding enough people willing to take “tours” and bring back information regarding the health and welfare of the WAO’s Leslie Road animals. After a 15-minute conversation, Mr. Elroy said he would “get back with me.” I never heard from him until last week.

Our conversation last week started off very well. We spoke for about two hours until I made the mistake of saying something like, “thank goodness for the Rexano.org/WAO web page for if this site did not exist, then we would have a lot more animals to place.”

Apparently, I made a major faux “paw” when I brought up the Rexano.org site, for there was this l-o-n-g pause, and then the words “do you know what the Rexano.org site represents?” was uttered. Here comes the politics.

I explained that I understand what the Rexano website represents, but in this case, Zuzana was the only person who reached out to me, offering to help the WAO animals. Several years ago, there was so much information fragmented on the web regarding the WAO that it was difficult for anyone to learn more about WAO and its alleged fraudulent business practices. Today, folks can read the complete history of the WAO investigation process on the Rexano site. The Rexano.org website was instrumental in saving lives as we were able to stop the relocation of primates from two well-known universities, a bear, and five tigers to he WAO. What a blessing!

Unfortunately, this explanation was ignored when I was told I should distance myself from the Rexano people. This statement was followed with a lengthy explanation regarding the reasons why I should not be working with Zuzana.

This really irked me! The website was not put up because of politics, but in an effort to save lives. Isn’t that what all good animal people strive for—saving animal lives? Is this not one thing all the animal factions can agree upon?

Over and over again, Don kept saying, “I don’t know if I can work with someone who works with Zuzana.”

After his Rexano lecture, I lost a little of my cool. I brought up that I went to all the big animal rights/rescue groups – HSUS, ASPCA, Houston SPCA, San Antonio Animal Defense League, SPCA of Dallas, WSPA, IFAW, and Voices for Animals (San Antonio branch). Not one single group offered to help me. These groups either ducked my calls, refused to call or email me back, or simply poo-poo’d my concerns. So when an animal welfare group extended a helping hand, I reached out and grabbed this life-line for the sake of the WAO animals.

How dare anyone associated with these AR groups have the audacity to criticize my methods of saving animals! I was working with a group that wanted to save the WAO animals, not close it down. Exactly what did THEY do to help save the WAO animals? Why didn’t they help me when the animals needed help the most? It was at this point Don reminded me that he and I spoke about the WAO animals while he still worked for another Texas sanctuary. I replied “That’s right, we did talk about the WAO in 2006, and you said you would get back with me. You NEVER did.”

Needless to say, I have not heard from him since. I sent him some information he requested and I offered to send him additional information about the WAO case, but thus far, he has not responded to my emails. I guess I have been cut-off once again! No loss there since he was uncooperative the first time.

I just do not understand how anyone can allow politics to cloud important issues such as saving the WAO animals. One animal welfare group put aside its political agenda to help save lives. Why couldn’t the animal rights groups done the same? I know, I know, it’s all about money and power. Just for once though, I wish both groups could come together over this one issue. I’d bet they would find they have more in common than they thought.