Now that sufficient time has passed in regards to the horrific deaths of 49 Ohio exotic wild animals, I believe I can answer the question, “Why did the authorities allow this man to keep the exotic animals after he was convicted of animal abuse?”
The quick and simple answer? Money.
Sadly, the general public has the same illusion as I used to have back when I first filed my WAO complaints of animal abuse with the USDA/APHIS and Texas OAG/Charitable Trust Division. You see, I thought that the government would never stand by and let people who abused animals to remain in their non-profit charitable positions or be allowed to continue caring for the very type of animals they were accused of harming! I imagined the government riding into San Antonio on a white horse, ready to save the day, removing the animals from corrupt and abusive board of directors and staff and turn them all over to a new board of directors and employees! Boy was I naïve.
Everyone must remember one thing – government operates on tax-payer dollars. Salaries and benefits are paid from our taxes. The last thing the government wants to do is take over any wild animal “zoo” or “sanctuary” without private dollars supporting the receivership. Government is not in the business of expending money to take over the care and financial responsibilities of large animal organizations (either private or non-profit) simply because it costs a lot of “unbudgeted” money to take on such ventures.
Instead, government entities such as the Texas OAG and USDA/APHIS, would rather fine the organization over and over again, thereby bringing in revenue into the government coffers. The OAG and USDA will not close a facility (laboratory, sanctuary, zoo, or private owner) unless there is gross (and I really mean gross) animal care negligence. Now think back—how many facilities have you heard about in the news within the last five years that were closed by the USDA or OAG for violations of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA)?
Now think back and remember within the same time period how many media reported fines were either issued to private or non-profit organizations? Chances are you probably heard more about private owners being fined than non-profit corporations, and yet there is a back log of cases filed by the USDA against licensed facilities with the Federal courts!
WAO has a record of being fined by the USDA on more than one occasion. As far as I know, there is only one WAO fine that was made public:
In 1999, the USDA charged WAO with numerous violations of the Welfare Animal Act for its role in the death of three big cats it acquired and transported from the Spokane Washington Zoo in 1996. The acquired cats were flown from Washington to Texas and when they finally arrived at the WAO facility, two tigers and a cougar were dead. The USDA reported that among the violations committed by the WAO were failures to ventilate the too-small containers and to provide veterinary care for the animals.
“At no time did I feel the crates used were too small as to cause the deaths of the animals, even though they were slightly cramped,” said Carol Asvestas in a 1997 affidavit. At the time, she told the Express-News that she considered the charges “ridiculous” but didn’t want to fight the $12,000 fine and a 90-day suspension of her exhibitor’s license in court.
So what were the lives of three big cats worth to the USDA? $12,000. And just who paid for the fines? And just who paid for the fines? Donors of course! Not the directors, not the Board—donors!
The other case took place in October 17, 2003 and I can assure you, the entire board of directors was not told of the $750 fine for WAO’s failure to provide post procedural veterinary care to a male tiger that was transported to the WAO in accordance with established vet medical and nursing procedures. For you see, prior to the animal being transported, the tiger was heavily sedated and neutered just a few hours before he was moved to San Antonio. After the tiger was moved into his enclosure, no one bothered to check on the tiger during the evening hours. What is worse is no one thought it was strange that the tiger did not revive later in the morning/early afternoon from all the drugs given to him. He should have been alert by the time he arrived at the WAO. This poor tiger died a needless and tragic death.
What was the loss of this tiger valued at by the USDA? $750 fine. And just who paid for the fine? Once again, the Donors! Not the Directors, not the Board—Donors!
If you are a regular reader of this blog, then you know all about my frustration as to the proposed $25k fine the OAG wanted to levy against WAO for misappropriation of funds and violating the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices. And why the USDA wanted to originally fine the WAO $5,175 for violations of the AWA instead of closing the facility down! And again, who was going to pay for all these proposed fines? Yep, you guessed it—Donors! Not the directors, not the Board—donors!
The OAG and USDA have no problems “fining” an owner or organization over and over again, just as long as there is money to collect. Once the owner’s piggy bank is busted, then the government is forced to take action. This is a sad, but true reality.
A few years ago, Dr. Pannill from the USDA/APHIS told me that there were a lot worse places she was checking on than the WAO. I shudder to think what could be worse than denying sick or injured animals’ medical care resulting in animals dying very slow, painful deaths. I cannot imagine a worse situation where escaping WAO bears and wolves are shot to death and buried in one of the two large 12’x12’ burial pits. I cannot image a worse situation where WAO foxes, caracals, wolves and wolf-hybrids, cougars, and monkeys escaped their enclosures and some never seen again. I cannot imagine a worse situation where the majority of the big cats suffered from vitamin A deficiency resulting in severe neurological problems and ultimately an untimely death. I cannot imagine a worse situation where non-human primates are allowed to slowly freeze to death when the temperatures dropped below 38 degrees and the WAO’s own vet believed they were sufficiently acclimated to survive in temperatures as low as 17 degrees. I cannot imagine a worse situation where…well, I think you know where I am going with this. Oh, and remember that escaped from the WAO, Hanna, who was shot over 16 times by sheriff deputies? What people don't know is that Carol Asvestas didn't just fall back onto a large fallen tree branch (as I was told), but rather Hanna bit her on her backside. I was told this by someone who was there and apparently Carol Asvestas' medical records will confirm this story that she was bit by the lioness and purposely covered up this information for fear of a full investigation into the incident. I was told Hanna died from human error and not from the false story the Asvestas' tried to circulate that a former "disgruntled ex-employee" released just Hanna for some imagined reason, out of all the animals living at the Talley Road facility.
Of course, the irony is not lost on me when I report that not only did the USDA and OAG file a claim against the WAO Talley Road estate in the Western District Bankruptcy Court, but so did just about every player that was responsible in the WAO downfall! Oh, and just who bought the WAO land? WAO and IFAW Donors. So who is really paying off the government and the people involved in the demise of the WAO? Donors! Hey former WAO and IFAW donors, do you feel like you have been taxed twice by your government?
Let me make this very clear – our government reacts to problems. Government is not proactive. Unless something horrific occurs on their watch, nothing will ever be done to protect animals from abusive owners. The laws aren’t the problem – our own government is the problem. So if you expect this tragedy to make a difference in how animal abusers are prosecuted, think again. It’s never about the animal. It is always about the money.
Later:
More developments regarding the Ohio tragedy.
I learned that in January several organizations, after learning about 80+ animals were starving in Ohio, approached the Sheriff requesting the animals be rehomed before they all starved to death.
The Sheriff allegedly replied that no one was going to enter Mr. Thompson's property without the man's permission and remove his property. Apparently, the Sheriff made it very clear that until Mr. Thompson returned from prison, no one was going to relocate his animals. If the Sheriff truly made these statements, why would he refuse to check on and ultimately relocate the animals? I cannot imagine any resonable person going out and see dead animals on the property and NOT do something about the situation. Well, I was told the Sheriff and Mr. Thompson were part of the good ole boys club--in other words, they were old friends.
I asked how the 49 animals survived all this time without food and I was told several hunters and a shelter provided food for the animals for some time, but less and less food was provided as it became clear the woman was not going to relocate the animals and Mr. Thompson's release was eminent. The woman supposedly did not want to relocate the animals while her husband was in jail because she had been threatened by Mr. Thompson, telling her that she had better take care of his animals until he returned or else.
Again, assuming this is all true, we witnessed another example of laws working, but people failing. Laws are only as good as they are enforced and thanks to the good ole boy mentality the animals paid the ultimate price.
Later:
This is an excellent write-up about what happened in Ohio. I doubt it was popular with groups like HSUS, but let's face it, it's the truth!
Later:
More developments regarding the Ohio tragedy.
I learned that in January several organizations, after learning about 80+ animals were starving in Ohio, approached the Sheriff requesting the animals be rehomed before they all starved to death.
The Sheriff allegedly replied that no one was going to enter Mr. Thompson's property without the man's permission and remove his property. Apparently, the Sheriff made it very clear that until Mr. Thompson returned from prison, no one was going to relocate his animals. If the Sheriff truly made these statements, why would he refuse to check on and ultimately relocate the animals? I cannot imagine any resonable person going out and see dead animals on the property and NOT do something about the situation. Well, I was told the Sheriff and Mr. Thompson were part of the good ole boys club--in other words, they were old friends.
I asked how the 49 animals survived all this time without food and I was told several hunters and a shelter provided food for the animals for some time, but less and less food was provided as it became clear the woman was not going to relocate the animals and Mr. Thompson's release was eminent. The woman supposedly did not want to relocate the animals while her husband was in jail because she had been threatened by Mr. Thompson, telling her that she had better take care of his animals until he returned or else.
Again, assuming this is all true, we witnessed another example of laws working, but people failing. Laws are only as good as they are enforced and thanks to the good ole boy mentality the animals paid the ultimate price.
Later:
This is an excellent write-up about what happened in Ohio. I doubt it was popular with groups like HSUS, but let's face it, it's the truth!
Carson Springs Wildlife Foundation & Sanctuary
To all our friends and animal lovers,
The release of animals in Ohio was a sad and tragic event committed by a mentally disturbed individual. I have been answering questions non stop and the distinction some people have trouble grasping is none of us can prevent a crazy from doing something crazy in any arena. The animals were released, they did not escape and most likely only strayed far from their enclosures when pursued because the only home and safety they know is their enclosure.The animals paid the ultimate price and there was really no other way to handle it. My experience says the animals were probably not looking to hurt anyone, they were most likely scared and confused which does make them more volitile and law enforcement had no way to contain them except with guns.
This isolated event in no way reflects on the hundreds of Sanctuaries and animal owners who would never put their animals or the public at risk. If what I read is correct, the authorites should have been on top of this facility when the owner was incarcerated to be sure the care and caging were up to standard and a licensed person was in charge. That may have been the case and it still doesn't prevent the owner from going off the rails.
As I pointed out in an interview, large exotic animals ,on the extremely rare occasion that it happens ,mostly only hurt their keepers, people who have accepted the risk. You do not read about any of the public being hurt but I frequently do read about people being hurt or even killed by dogs. The public is in much more danger from agressive dogs, unfortunately usually made that way by their owners.
Just after my interview regarding this event , I had a 6th grade class book a field trip and we are giving educational tours almost every day. There is real educational value on nature, conservation, different species, geography and proper animal care that is imparted to future animal conservators thru visits to our facility. Friday at 6:33am, October 21, 2011.
No comments:
Post a Comment