This is the continuing journal of a former TX exotic animal sanctuary board director. These are my personal accounts and opinions relating to my investigation into the sanctuary. My thoughts and opinions change from time to time—I consider this a necessary consequence of having an open mind. This journal is intended to provide a semi-permanent point in time snapshot and as such any thoughts and opinions expressed within older posts may not the same, nor even similar, to those I may hold today.
More heartbreaking news...another WAO tiger died today at Carolina Tiger Rescue--Bali. The following is from Bali's Facebook Memorial Page:
On May 24,2014, Dr. Lassiter sedated Bali to get some blood work as he was clearly feeling run down. Blood tests were normal but his red blood cell count was very low and no new blood cells were being created (non- regenerative anemia). Between the muscle wasting and the anemia, she felt strongly that he had cancer. Dr. Lassiter and Curator Kathrn Bertok made the decision to euthanize. Necropsy revealed a mass in his abdomen around the blood supply to his intestines and masses on his heart and in and around his lungs. Dr. Lassiter felt that it was primary peritoneal cancer with metastasis to his lungs and heart.
Breaks my heart to learn that another former WAO tiger from the Talley Road property died from cancer. So many of the WAO animals, from big cats to primates, died from cancer. I have no doubt they died from poor food, water, and health care they received at the WAO. No doubt at all.
God Bless you in Heaven forever and ever sweet Bali. May you run wild and free with Kizmet, Java, and Titan.
Six former employees of a Pine County sanctuary for exotic wildcats filed a whistleblower lawsuit Tuesday contending they were fired or forced to resign after they reported illegal activities to the organization’s board of directors.
The sudden dismissal of so many employees — all of whom had received positive job reviews — from the Wildcat Sanctuary was a “startling example of unlawful retaliation,” the suit said.
Five firings and a forced resignation came after employees revealed that Executive Director Tammy Thies was spending money donated to the nonprofit sanctuary for her house, dogs and other personal uses, it said.
The suit, filed by attorney Craig Brandt of Minneapolis, also alleged that the sanctuary and Thies violated Minnesota wage laws and that plaintiffs were defamed in public statements made by Thies and board members.
Sanctuary officials didn’t respond to inquiries Tuesday, but issued a short statement: “We’re in receipt of the lawsuit. The Wildcat Sanctuary plans to vigorously defend these claims in court.”
The suit comes just weeks after a Minnesota attorney general’s report confirmed Thies had spent thousands of dollars in sanctuary funds for personal use despite earlier public denials by board members Gail Plewacki, Peggy Callahan and Sue Schmitt.
The report said Thies spent hundreds of dollars for such items as underwear, movies, hair-removal products and sky-diving lessons for her husband, $550 in taxes for her house, $3,200 in propane to heat it, and $4,900 for four years of cellphone service.
Evidence of “extensive use” of sanctuary credit cards for personal use and “double reimbursement” for some expenses was found, the attorney general’s office said. An agreement filed in court specified numerous conditions for the sanctuary to remain in nonprofit status, including hiring an outside auditor and filing regular reports with the attorney general’s office for five years.
Allegations filed
The whistleblower suit filed Tuesday accused Thies and the sanctuary of failing to pay overtime and neglecting to keep accurate records of hours that employees worked. The suit also said that she told them they had to spend a minimum number of overnight stays at the sanctuary each month without additional compensation.
Among other allegations in the suit: Thies told staff to forge her signature on credit card receipts on the advice of board members, she refused to hire certain people “expressly because of their ages,” she ingested prescription drugs intended for wildcats, and she drove drunk in a sanctuary vehicle after a fundraising party.
“You have placed one individual above the entire organization including the people and the animals and it shames me to be a part of it,” Alicia Kroll, a five-year animal keeper who resigned in October, wrote to board members. She also complained of “hostile working conditions and unethical practices.”
The other former employees named as plaintiffs were lead keeper Trista Fischer, Christine Dietsche, Christina Mastry, Natalie Warnacutt and Holly Whitney. Those five employees were fired in November after a summer and fall of turmoil at the sanctuary. Eight board members left, more were added, and the suit said the departed employees were disparaged publicly as troublemakers.
‘Hostile hearsay’
In a news story last fall, board member Callahan referred to allegations by the employees as “hostile hearsay” and said “disgruntled people started rumors that led to upheaval at the sanctuary,” the suit said. In another interview, according to the suit, Callahan said employee complaints amounted to a “witch hunt.”
Plewacki said accusations of theft were “patently false” and “nobody’s stealing money from the sanctuary, period,” according to the suit. Schmitt said an independent audit “disproved the charges,” the suit said.
The attorney general’s report said it was unable to verify more than $3,000 in reimbursements to Thies because financial documentation was missing.
The whistleblower suit seeks a jury trial to determine damages for defamation, punitive damages and compensation for lost income and benefits.
The Wildcat Sanctuary, near Sandstone, Minn., is a refuge to more than 100 lions, tigers, cougars and other abandoned exotic cats once owned privately until they became public safety threats. It’s funded entirely with private donations, although many donors withdrew their support last fall after the firings occurred.
The sanctuary has an annual budget of about $850,000.
The suit was filed under Minnesota’s Whistleblower Act, which protects employees from retaliation for reporting suspected violations of law.
Here's my two cents worth on this latest development:
I applaud the former workers who are suing the sanctuary for alleged violations of the Whistle-blower Act and FLSA laws. I pray they get their day in court and eventually win their case. I imagine other wild animal sanctuaries wished TWC sanctuary would just settled this case out of court as it will certainly put a black eye on the face of all wild animal sanctuaries.
If it is true that the director ingested drugs intended for the cats (i.e. pain killers), then she should be fired IMMEDIATELY! Driving drunk in a sanctuary owned vehicle -- hmmm...Thies sounds like another Ron Asvestas. I do not understand why the TWS board has not fired Thies yet. Don't they know they too can be held criminally liable for her misdeeds if they do nothing to stop the criminal? They need to cut her loose before the sanctuary goes down hill like the WAO. I am really worried about the former WAO animals living there now...
What surprised me was that GFAS is standing by this sanctuary; so far they have not been stripped of their GFAS accreditation. I wonder what it would take for an accredited sanctuary to lose it's accreditation? Certainly not theft of donated funds or major violations of the USDA AWA (See Wildcat Haven's employee death blog posting). Just goes to show that GFAS is just for "show" and does not take its fiduciary responsibilities that seriously.
Wow! Tammy Theis is taking a page right out of the Asvestas' playbook--blame the whistle-blowers for her bad acts and behavior. Shameful. In my opinion, thieving Theis should be in jail. Sadly, I know exactly what the whistle-blowers are going through right now. I pray they hold tight and stay together--the truth needs to be made public about what really goes on behind the sanctuary's doors. Again, I wish no WAO animals went to this place.
Thieving Theis should be ashamed that the article listed below made it in the news. Would you want to donate to this place after reading this article? Theis should leave the organization for the good of the organization and its animals--but I think we all know she will never leave this place on her own.
In Minnesota, six people have filed a whistleblower suit against The Wildcat Sanctuary in Pine County, alleging that they were fired or were forced to resign from their jobs for reporting misuse of organizational funds by the executive director. Minnesota’s Whistleblower Act disallows that type of retaliation against employees who report suspected violations of law.
Tammy Thies is the executive director and founder of the sanctuary, and a state attorney general’s report says that sanctuary funds were used by her for personal expenses, including purchases of groceries, ladies’ underwear, skydiving lessons for Thies’ husband, “bawdy books,” and utilities for her private house. This behavior was acknowledged in a signed agreement between the sanctuary’s board chairwoman Gail Plewacki and the Attorney General’s Office.
Thies was placed on administrative leave while the investigation was active, but has been reinstated to leadership. However, according to Legal Newsline, “TWS must recruit and elect at least three additional members to its board who are approved by the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits, review and evaluate all expenses to determine their reasonableness and propriety and appoint a third-party monitor to provide guidance and instruction to the organization’s board. Within 60 days of executing the agreement, TWS must undertake a comprehensive review to determine the amount of TWS funds allegedly spent by Thies. If she refuses to pay back TWS for the alleged expenditures, TWS must sever its relationship with Thies.”—Ruth McCambridge
Much later:
For months, I've been wondering what happened to Trista Fischer's lawsuit against thieving Theis and her merry band of board members. Turns out, this case was "quietly" and "confidentially" settled. According to WCS' 2014 990, Ms. Fischer received $101, 669 as an "employment settlement" from the sanctuary. Like Carol Asvestas, thieving Theis did not want the employee's case to go public, so WCS donors paid over $100k for the board of directors mistakes. And the best part of it all, thieving Theis can now plunder the sanctuary's coffers once again! Oh yay!
WCS 990 2014 (Refer to page 7 for "employment settlement")
As this case finally winds down to the very end, I cannot help but reflect on what transpired over the last eight years. This has been an incredibly long journey and soon it is about to come to an end.
I must have told the WAO story a hundred times, each time with just a little bit more detail than the last based on new information. Having said that, I've decided to give a short question and answer post for those people jumping in at the end of the story instead of reading through all the trials and tribulations of the last several years.
Okay, so here goes:
1. Why did you file complaints against the Wild Animal Orphanage (WAO) with various national animal groups, federal, state, and local government agencies?
Answer: When I realized the WAO board of directors had no intention of protecting the WAO animals and its assets, I knew I had to speak out. No one else was willing to take a stand for the animals. Even though I was not a paid employee (just a board director and animal caretaker volunteer), I believed it was my fiduciary responsibility to "blow the whistle" on alleged misappropriation of funds and violations of the Animal Welfare Act. Someone needed to take a stand and sadly, I was the only one willing from the WAO to speak out on behalf of the animals in 2006.
2. Didn't you know that the WAO stole and misused personnel for years?
Answer: Over the years I made what I thought were small allowances for the WAO's bad business practices because I believed in what the WAO stood for--providing a permanent home to exotic wild animals. I did not know that the WAO was stealing money from the animals until late 2005. I was aware that the Asvestas used community service restitution workers at their home--everyone at the WAO knew of this and yet no one spoke out--including the CSR workers. When I questioned the practice, I was told by Ron Asvestas that the workers always took care of the animals first. Later on I learned that was not necessarily true. I was told by the WAO employees that they were instructed not to speak with me regarding operational matters at the WAO--even when I was a board director. I basically had to find out on my own what was really happening at the "sanctuary", without the assistance of the workers or other board members. Once I had enough proof to confront the board (knowing I had to quit afterwards because of what I learned) I called an emergency board meeting...and the rest is now history.
3. Most people would file a complaint and walk away. Why did you work so hard on this case?
Answer: I could not rely on others to follow through on my complaints to government agencies. A couple of people filed complaints with the federal and state agencies over the years, but they never followed through and so their complaints were quietly dropped. I knew I had to see this case to the end--no matter what.
Sometimes you just have to find the courage to see something through to the end, no matter the cost. It wasn't easy for me to stay with this case for so many years. But quiting and walking away from the WAO animals was not an option.
4. In the beginning of the blog you sounded so hopeful that either the USDA or Texas OAG would seek justice for the animals. Your tone significantly changed towards the end of the blog. Was there justice for the animals that died at the WAO?
Answer: No, there was no justice for all the animals that died needlessly at the WAO. Government failed the animals--horribly.
For those of you who are going through something similar to what I went through, please understand that Government is NOT your friend. It is a "machine" with soulless people punching the clock each day, minus weekends and holidays. There is no passion to save the animals in Government. The employees may have started out wanting to make a difference, to help people, to help animals and then over the years had that passion beaten out of them because of politics, procedures, and/or insane "rules." At this point, the employees just want to collect a paycheck and make the cases go away with little effort as possible, so they can eventually retire from the system. The last thing Government wants is for you to stay on them, asking questions, and following up on leads. Government, after a few months, will want you to just go away so they can either dismiss the case or cut a deal with the criminals. The more you press Government to do the right thing, the more it will dig in and do the opposite. YOU will eventually be seen as the enemy of Government.
Government is NOT there to protect the animals. It is only there to protect a PROCESS. There is no compassion or justice in Government. That must come from you and people willing to stand with you.
I wish I could be more optimistic about our Government, but the reality is only you can save the animals -- not the Government. Never put your trust in Government to save animals because it will only disappoint you. While I am not against Government, I am against complacency. Government, if run be ethical and moral people can make a significant difference. Sadly, finding ethical and moral people willing to show passion in their work is few and far to find.
5. What do you say to the person who wrote a comment on another website that you were only seeking attention for yourself--that you are some sort of media "hog"?
Answer: There is a person out there that is very upset that she was not part of the WAO case to the end. Her attempts to hijack this case, without forethought or knowledge of what was going on at the WAO, were defeated. People who lie and sensationalize stories to the media in the hopes of getting on TV, radio, or print had no business pursing the WAO case with me. This person was very angry because she could not couple her name with the now closed WAO. For the record, I asked news agencies to focus on the plight of the WAO animals and not on me--this case was about saving the animals--period. I am not one for cameras (there are very few pictures of me in existence) and I certainly have no desire to have my personal life exposed to the public. I'll leave that to the true media hounds!
6. Were you aware of the WAO killing and selling animal parts/skins or selling animals to Mexico?
Answer: I was unable to find any hard evidence that the atrocities listed above ever occurred. Had I found any evidence to the contrary I would have filed yet another complaint with the Texas OAG and USDA.
7. Knowing what you know now, would you have pursued this case from beginning to end?
Answer: Now that's a really tough question. This case devastated so many lives -- three people died during the course of the case. Over 100 animals died at the WAO. My elder animals saw more of my back at the computer than they did of me; they have since passed away. I've aged at least 10 years and I am now battling severe health issues all resulting from this case. I am now incredibly tired.
Knowing what I know now, I definitely would handle this case much differently. I would have focused a lot more on garnering public support -- lots of media, protests, getting other animal groups involved, etc. I would not have gone the route of pressing my case with the USDA and Texas OAG. Sadly, the government did NOTHING to help save the WAO animals.
To see an example of protests making a difference in the lives of animals, we don't have too far to look in San Antonio--the SeaWorld case. I'm sure animal advocates went to the USDA looking for help regarding the care and treatment of SeaWorld's whales and dolphins and were undoubtedly turned away (the paperwork was probably in order). So instead large animal groups turned to the public for help. With all the protesting and mass viewing of "Blackfish" on CNN, the animal groups were able to obtain some concessions for the animals. Sadly, it took a lot of people just to help the SeaWorld whales and dolphins. Can you imagine how many people it would have taken to save the 300+ WAO animals?
Never-the-less, if you find yourself in a similar situation as I, file your complaints with the government (gotta cover your bases, you know) and then garner a lot of public support. Produce a video. Get the media to air the video. Organize several protests with the media in tow. Keep pounding the pseudo-sanctuary with videos, pictures, reports, until a change is finally made to improve the lives of the animals and protect the organization's assets. Sadly, the government will not do a single thing to help you or the animals. YOU will have to be that change.
Would I do it all over again? I'd like to think so, but in light of all that's been lost, I'm just not sure any more...
Sigh.
Yes. Yes I would. For you see, I had a duty, a fiduciary responsibility to protect the animals and the assets of the organization as its former Vice President, Treasurer, and volunteer Animal Caretaker of 10 years. All of us at the sanctuary had this same responsibility. Sadly, those who failed the animals and donors, had no honor and were NOT dedicated to the WAO animals. They were not committed to the care and enrichment of the animals and I believe they simply had no "heart." I have to wonder how they could stand looking at themselves in the mirror day after day, knowing that so many animals died at the WAO--deaths that could have been prevented if only we had all stood shoulder to shoulder during the early years of the case. People who have no heart should not be operating or working at a non-profit organization dedicated to helping animals, children, or the elderly.
Same goes for government workers. They all had a fiduciary responsibility to protect the animals and contributions made by donors. Instead they all favored "procedure" instead of doing the right thing. Makes me wonder how many animals died and how much money was stolen each year throughout the United States because "government officials" chose to look the other way instead of upholding the laws on the books.
This case has truly been one heck of an eye opener for me.
9. If you could, would you have pursued the case in a different manner other than what was described above?
Absolutely. I would have gone to the social media (Facebook and Twitter) and all the well-known animal groups, laying out the case that the WAO was a "roadside zoo", the Asvestas were secret backyard breeders, selling the offspring to circuses in the US and around the world. I would have focused on one particular animal's plight, Bubba for example, to get folks to rally behind me. For you see, animal sanctuaries are considered "good" and roadside zoos, backyard breeders and circuses are considered "bad." So just by tweeking my allegations, I believe this horrible case would have ended much, much sooner with the help of the local media, big animal groups, and social media attention. So what is a roadside zoo anyway?
Roadside zoos run the gamut from small menageries where animals are kept in barren cages constructed of concrete and metal bars to larger compounds that are surrounded by chain-link fencing. They are usually privately owned and not accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. The focus is on amusing customers rather than meeting the animals’ needs.
A roadside zoo is considered somewhat worse than private ownership by the media, animal groups, and by the animal loving public because roadside zoo "private" owners are accused of using their animals for money making purposes only and they really don't care about the animals. Question: Can a roadside zoo also be a non-profit sanctuary? Hmmm...now that's a great question, isn't it? Is Big Cat Rescue in Florida (takes in several million tourist dollars in 2014) a roadside zoo? Anyone?
Had I gone this route, declaring the WAO as a roadside zoo, I may have gotten PETA and Voices for Animals to demonstrate outside the WAO with me. I may have been on TV, Facebook and Twitter, lamenting the plight of Bubba, or Princess, or Jake, crying on cue when it came to describing the horrible conditions the animals were forced to live in, day in and day out. IFAW representatives could have stood with us, demanding the IFAW-funded bears, NJ tigers, and other animals receive the large, natural quarters they were promised years ago by the Asvestas. And, well, you get the idea.
Could have, perhaps should have, sadly didn't.
8. What would you advise people who are in a similar situation?
Answer: Read all my blogs from beginning to end. Learn from my mistakes and from my minor victories. Start studying all available laws that pertain to your case. If you cannot write, find someone who can help you write because you will be producing a lot of letters. Make sure you have all your facts at hand. Do no rely on hearsay. You must focus on cold hard facts. Always use words like "alleged" or "I was told". Be very specific without being too wordy. Take written or video statement from witnesses. Find someone willing to listen to you -- friends, family, co-workers -- because you will go crazy if you don't bounce ideas around others. You will need a lot of outside support to get through your case, so if you are a shy person, now it's time to get out there and meet new friends. Never be afraid to ask for help--you never know--they may be the person you need to advance your case!
Stay in shape. Eat healthy food. Take breaks and enjoy life. The last thing you'll want to do is regret helping the animals if you get really sick. Regret is really a horrible feeling, especially if you are not victorious, because it's hard to justify why you put so much energy into something that eventually failed.
Keep in mind that what you "want" and what actually "happens" may be two different things. Case in point, I wanted "change in management" at the WAO. What actually happened was the WAO closed its doors forever. Be prepared for the worse--have a contingency plan else you may regret getting involved in the first place.
And whatever you do, never give up! Animals and donors depend on people like you to stand up for what is right. You have got to stay on top of the investigation from start to finish, else nothing will ever be accomplished. Despite the odds, you can make a huge difference in the lives of the animals. Even your failures can result in positive changes for the animals.
9. What would you recommend to someone who is afraid to do the right thing?
Answer: Just do something! Maybe it's not you leading the charge. Maybe it is someone who can handle the mental and physical stresses of following through a long tough case until the end. But if you don't reach out and ask for help, nothing will be resolved and the animal(s) will continue to suffer.
So please.
Just do something.
10. What are you doing now that the case is almost over?
Answer: I am working on restoring my physical health and spending as much time as I can with my fur family. Without going into much detail, I can say that I was diagnosed with very serious health issues. Two doctors told me I was literally a heart beat away from having a heart attack or another stroke. So needless to say, improving my health is most important to me now. I am also working on improving my mental outlook. I was so profoundly disappointed that there was no justice for the WAO animals that I allowed negative emotions to bleed into my life. When I left In-Sync Exotics, I decided to start my own Twitter page, dedicated to humorous and uplifting tweets of amazing animal antics and people who are my "animal heroes". Who knew there was such a need on Twitter! My little Twitter page is growing by leaps and bounds because folks, just like me, need to see some good in a world that is filled with so much hate and disappointment. This page has been quite the Godsend that my soul needed.
11. You write a lot about God in your posts--do you really believe He helped you with the WAO case?
Answer: Absolutely! Without Jesus in my life I would not have been grounded and able to see the big picture. While the case did not end the way I hoped, God made sure the case ended the best way possible for the WAO animals. I wanted the WAO animals to stay in San Antonio so badly and all for selfish reasons but God made it clear that the answer to my prayers could never be "yes." Thankfully the majority of the WAO animals now have wonderful homes and for that I will truly be humbled and grateful. Every step of this case, God was with me; every time I came to a roadblock in the case He showed me a different way at looking at the challenge. Whenever I needed help, He sent someone to assist me. In fact, He sent the most amazing people to me at just the right time, every time, without fail, resulting in the conclusion of this case. I could not have gone through this case without Him. And knowing that I will see the WAO animals again in Heaven some day really makes my heart sing with joy. I am truly #grateful for God's love and support!
12. What are you thoughts on exotic animal sanctuaries? Will you ever volunteer at another sanctuary?
Answer: I have zero interest in ever volunteering at another exotic animal sanctuary--ever again. I personally have no intention of donating my hard earned money to another sanctuary simply because I do not know for sure my donation will actually go towards animal care. If after reading this blog you feel comfortable donating to a non-profit animal sanctuary, may I suggest you first check out their tax returns on Guidestar.org? The last three returns are free and they will give you an idea of how much money is actually spent on animal care versus "fundraising". Check to see if they posted current returns and look at how much money is going towards animal care vs salaries. You may want to donate needed items instead of cash in order to make sure your hard earned dollars are spent wisely, so be sure to check out the sanctuaries' wish lists.
I want to make it clear that I'm not against animal sanctuaries. I am against folks who lie or withhold vital information about the sanctuary's animals and/ or steal funds or assets from its donors. Many sanctuaries do not operate as a real business and just because a sanctuary is verified or accredited through GFAS or ASA does not mean the board of directors will wisely spend your donation(s) on the animals. In my opinion, certification means absolutely NOTHING to a contributor.
13. Are there any changes you'd like to see take place with exotic animal sanctuaries?
Yes, absolutely. I'd like sanctuaries to be more transparent. The last 3-5 tax returns should be prominently displaced on their web site homepage with an INDEPENDENT financial review conducted on each return by a private outside accounting firm.
There should be a web page, kept current, of all the animals on the property. Regular updates should be provided to the public on the health and welfare of each animals. If an animal dies, a necropsy should be conducted and posted on the web page along with the death notice. There should be extensive medical records on each animal from intake to death.
Donors should have a clear picture of how much money is spent on the care and feeding of the animals. A clear notice should be posted on the website that all donations goes to the general fund and may be used, in some cases, for political activities and not necessarily for the care of the animals (like in the case of Big Cat Rescue).
The land which the animals reside upon should belong to the sanctuary and not "leased" back to the sanctuary by the founders. Often times, the founders will charge the sanctuary hundreds if not thousands of dollars a year for the use of the land where the animals reside. Often times, the amount greatly exceeds any taxes owed, so the founder ends up making a pretty penny off the sanctuary. All one has to do is look at the organization's 990, look for the entry pertaining to "rental property fee" and then compare that amount against the on-line tax assessor-collector county record--and viola!--you can see if the sanctuary is paying more than it should for "rental fees." Often times, the founders place the sanctuary's land in their name so they can hold the ownership over the board--essentially securing board position(s) for life. Very sneaky. Very wrong.
Also, the last five years of USDA reports should be posted on the sanctuaries' websites with an explanation as to how the problems identified were resolved. All animal bites, scratches and escapes needs to be posted on the sanctuary's website with an explanation as to how the issues were resolved.
Essentially whatever laws applies to private owners, should be twice as stringent for exotic animal sanctuaries because they often have a lot more animals and they rely on tax-deductible donations for support. If the public supports these animals, then the public should know everything about these animals. There should be NO secrets. Volunteers and staff should not be told to keep quiet when an animal gets sick, hurt, or dies. If mistakes happen, resolve the situation and move on--no one should be told to lie to others about the operations at an exotic animal sanctuary or shelter. If you have to lie to the public, then you are not part of a "credible and trustworthy" sanctuary or shelter.
