Sunday, April 28, 2013
New Animal Cruelty Bill.
A new animal cruelty bill has passed the state Senate and House of Representatives that not only allows for multiple acts of animal cruelty, but states that a person who owns, has custody or possession of an animal and fails to act and certain injuries and death occur. Remember, Florida does have a provision for felony animal cruelty and certain minimum mandatory sentences for animal cruelty. The bill, is awaiting signature by Governor Scott. If it is signed it will go into effect on July 1, 2013. The House Bill is numbered HB 841 and the Senate version that passed is S 504 and S 650.
Saturday, January 12, 2013
Burmese Pythons
The issue of Burmese Pythons is a major issue in the U.S., especially Florida. They are a non-native species that reproduce quickly, destroy the ecosystem, and are large enough to eat allogators, deer, pets, and even small children. It's illegal to import them, but that doesn't really stop people. As long as dealers claim they are "captive bread", it's legal to posess them. Often the snakes become too difficult to care for and they are released into the wild. It's easy to import them because they are cold blooded, so when packed in suitcases, they're "asleep" and rarely move at all. Same with other exotic reptiles, even the rare Galapagos Turtles. There is a huge market for illegal reptiles. For one reason, snakes are interbread in an attempt to obtain different colors, including albino colors which are very rare, and thus are expensive. Although according to CITES, importation is supposedly difficult, it's relative easy to get around that issue. This big issue is whether they should be returned to their home land or euthanized because is they stay here our ecosystem will be ruined and they pose a severy threat to our way of life.
Homeless Man Saves Dog From Fire
This homeless man not only saved a dog from a fire but even gave him some of his food to eat.
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Thursday, August 12, 2010
2010 Pending Federal Legislation Affecting Animals
The Global Conservation Act—(H.R. 4959/S. 3508)—SUPPORT—if passed this bill would create an international conservation strategy for the U.S. government and provide the resources needed to turn the tide on the biodiversity crisis. It would make U.S. efforts to conserve biodiversity more effective and help coordinate those efforts across the federal government.
Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act—H.R. 3710—SUPPORT—if passed, this bill would ban all body-gripping traps, including snare, Conibear, and steel-jaw leghold, from being used on National Wildlife Refuges. This bill would make it illegal to trap on National Wildlife Refuges, thereby creating a safe haven for wildlife to dwell without unnatural and cruel threats. These traps kill indiscriminately—including pets and endangered species—whatever comes into their path. Steel jaw leg-hold traps clamp shut with bone-crushing force on an animal’s leg; the pain is so intense that an animal may chew off his or her own limb to escape on three legs. Conibear traps are designed to crush the animal’s spinal column for a quick kill. However, the trap often misses and clamps down on the chest or pelvis, crushing but not immediately killing the animal who suffers horribly. Snares are among the oldest form of trap, a simple noose made of thin wire, which tightens around an animal’s neck or body as he struggles to get away. For more information about trapping and the fur trade, please visit http://www.bornfreeusa.org/a10_trapping.php
Pet Safety and Protection Act—H.R. 3907 & S. 1834—SUPPORT—would prohibit Class B dealers (also called random source dealers) from selling dogs and cats for use in experimentation. Class B dealers sell non-purpose-bred dogs and cats for research. They are supposed to acquire the animals they sell only from other dealers, pounds and individuals who have bred and raised animals. However, they routinely fraudulently acquire pets, such as responding to “free to a good home” and even stealing pets to sell to laboratories. For more information about Class B dealers, please visit http://www.lcanimal.org/cmpgn/cmpgn_dog_theft.htm#axzz0wRm9w3lV
Great Ape Protection Act—H.R. 1326/S. 3694—SUPPORT—If passed, this bill would end invasive research on chimpanzees and would require the release of approximately 600 federally owned chimpanzees to permanent sanctuaries where they would be allowed to live out their lives in peace. There are currently more than 1,000 chimpanzees in U.S. laboratories. For more information on the Great Ape Protection Act, please visit http://www.releasechimps.org/mission/change-laws/the-great-ape-protection-act/
The Truth in Fur Labeling Act—H.R. 2480/S. 1076—SUPPORT—This bill passed the U.S. House in June, 2010. However, the Senate still needs to approve S. 1076. This bill would require accurate labeling in all fur-trimmed apparel. Many fur-trimmed items are labeled “faux fur” despite the fact that they may contain small amounts of “real” fur. Since the 1950s, any fur garment sold in the U.S. has had to include a label indicating the species of animal used and the country of origin, but there’s a gaping loophole in the current law that excludes fur-trimmed garments if the value of the fur is $150 or less. At current pelt prices, that means a jacket could have fur on its collar or cuffs from 30 rabbits ($5 each), nine chinchillas ($16 each), three foxes ($50 each), or three raccoon dogs ($45 each), and be sold without a label. The Federal Trade Commission estimates that one in every eight fur garments doesn’t require labeling. If this bill is passed, all items containing fur must be labeled as such.
Great Cats & Rare Canids Act—H.R. 411/S. 529—SUPPORT--This bill has passed the U.S. House and is waiting to be voted on in the Senate. If passed, this bill would assist in the conservation of great cat and wild dog populations around the world, which have significantly declined. Financial resources would be provided to conservation programs in nations within the range of these animals' populations, and funding would be provided to those with demonstrated expertise in protecting these animals.
Shark Conservation Act—H.R. 81/S. 850—SUPPORT—This bill has passed the U.S. House but is still pending in the Senate. The purpose of this bill is to protect sharks from the cruel practice of shark finning (cutting off sharks' fins and throwing the sharks back in the water, often while still alive). Many shark populations have sharply declined and are labeled as threatened or endangered. Up to 73 million sharks are killed annually for their fins, which are used in shark fin soup, an Asian delicacy. Congress banned the practice of shark finning in 2000, but enforcement is complex and the law left open a huge loophole. To circumvent this law, sharks are often finned at sea, and the fins then loaded on another vessel for transport. Surprisingly, it is legal under the 2000 law to separate the shark fins from the carcasses at sea as long as the fins weigh 5% or less of the weight of the shark. This legislation closes a loophole that currently permits a vessel to transport fins obtained illegally as long as the sharks were not finned aboard that vessel. If the bill passes, the shark must be brought back to port with the fin and carcass intact and fins cannot be transferred to another vessel. For more information about shark finning, please visit http://www.stopsharkfinning.net/. For information about shark conservation, please visit http://www.oceanicdefense.org/.
Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act—H.R. 3710—SUPPORT—if passed, this bill would ban all body-gripping traps, including snare, Conibear, and steel-jaw leghold, from being used on National Wildlife Refuges. This bill would make it illegal to trap on National Wildlife Refuges, thereby creating a safe haven for wildlife to dwell without unnatural and cruel threats. These traps kill indiscriminately—including pets and endangered species—whatever comes into their path. Steel jaw leg-hold traps clamp shut with bone-crushing force on an animal’s leg; the pain is so intense that an animal may chew off his or her own limb to escape on three legs. Conibear traps are designed to crush the animal’s spinal column for a quick kill. However, the trap often misses and clamps down on the chest or pelvis, crushing but not immediately killing the animal who suffers horribly. Snares are among the oldest form of trap, a simple noose made of thin wire, which tightens around an animal’s neck or body as he struggles to get away. For more information about trapping and the fur trade, please visit http://www.bornfreeusa.org/a10_trapping.php
Pet Safety and Protection Act—H.R. 3907 & S. 1834—SUPPORT—would prohibit Class B dealers (also called random source dealers) from selling dogs and cats for use in experimentation. Class B dealers sell non-purpose-bred dogs and cats for research. They are supposed to acquire the animals they sell only from other dealers, pounds and individuals who have bred and raised animals. However, they routinely fraudulently acquire pets, such as responding to “free to a good home” and even stealing pets to sell to laboratories. For more information about Class B dealers, please visit http://www.lcanimal.org/cmpgn/cmpgn_dog_theft.htm#axzz0wRm9w3lV
Great Ape Protection Act—H.R. 1326/S. 3694—SUPPORT—If passed, this bill would end invasive research on chimpanzees and would require the release of approximately 600 federally owned chimpanzees to permanent sanctuaries where they would be allowed to live out their lives in peace. There are currently more than 1,000 chimpanzees in U.S. laboratories. For more information on the Great Ape Protection Act, please visit http://www.releasechimps.org/mission/change-laws/the-great-ape-protection-act/
The Truth in Fur Labeling Act—H.R. 2480/S. 1076—SUPPORT—This bill passed the U.S. House in June, 2010. However, the Senate still needs to approve S. 1076. This bill would require accurate labeling in all fur-trimmed apparel. Many fur-trimmed items are labeled “faux fur” despite the fact that they may contain small amounts of “real” fur. Since the 1950s, any fur garment sold in the U.S. has had to include a label indicating the species of animal used and the country of origin, but there’s a gaping loophole in the current law that excludes fur-trimmed garments if the value of the fur is $150 or less. At current pelt prices, that means a jacket could have fur on its collar or cuffs from 30 rabbits ($5 each), nine chinchillas ($16 each), three foxes ($50 each), or three raccoon dogs ($45 each), and be sold without a label. The Federal Trade Commission estimates that one in every eight fur garments doesn’t require labeling. If this bill is passed, all items containing fur must be labeled as such.
Great Cats & Rare Canids Act—H.R. 411/S. 529—SUPPORT--This bill has passed the U.S. House and is waiting to be voted on in the Senate. If passed, this bill would assist in the conservation of great cat and wild dog populations around the world, which have significantly declined. Financial resources would be provided to conservation programs in nations within the range of these animals' populations, and funding would be provided to those with demonstrated expertise in protecting these animals.
Shark Conservation Act—H.R. 81/S. 850—SUPPORT—This bill has passed the U.S. House but is still pending in the Senate. The purpose of this bill is to protect sharks from the cruel practice of shark finning (cutting off sharks' fins and throwing the sharks back in the water, often while still alive). Many shark populations have sharply declined and are labeled as threatened or endangered. Up to 73 million sharks are killed annually for their fins, which are used in shark fin soup, an Asian delicacy. Congress banned the practice of shark finning in 2000, but enforcement is complex and the law left open a huge loophole. To circumvent this law, sharks are often finned at sea, and the fins then loaded on another vessel for transport. Surprisingly, it is legal under the 2000 law to separate the shark fins from the carcasses at sea as long as the fins weigh 5% or less of the weight of the shark. This legislation closes a loophole that currently permits a vessel to transport fins obtained illegally as long as the sharks were not finned aboard that vessel. If the bill passes, the shark must be brought back to port with the fin and carcass intact and fins cannot be transferred to another vessel. For more information about shark finning, please visit http://www.stopsharkfinning.net/. For information about shark conservation, please visit http://www.oceanicdefense.org/.
Friday, June 25, 2010
Search Warrants and Animal Cruelty
A California Appellate Court recently joined several other jurisdictions throughout the United States by ruling that the "exigent circumstances" doctrine, which creates an exception to the Fourth Amendment requirement that a search warrant must be obtained before police officers can enter the property of another, applies to cases in which animals are suffering. An exigent circumstance is a legal doctrine which provides an exception to the search warrant requirement guaranteed in the Fourth Amendment and allows a police officer to enter the property of another without a search warrant in order to preserve life or property when swift action must be taken to prevent imminent danger to life or serious damage to property. Without "exigent circumstances" or some other exception to the Fourth Amendment search warrant requirement, a police officer must have probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and must obtain a search warrant from a judge to enter a person's property. Obtaining a search warrant is obviously a relatively slow process which is why the exigent circumstances exception was established. An example of an exigent circumstance would be if an individual robbed someone with a weapon and ran into his/her house. Law enforcement would be able to enter the house to apprehend the suspect because the police officers would have a reasonable belief based upon the circumstances that the suspect would attempt to destroy the weapon and/or any evidence linking him to the crime, thus hindering the investigation of a serious offense. Exigent circumstances would also exist if an officer was called to investigate a domestic disturbance, arrived at the door and heard screaming and yelling, thus believing that someone was about to be injured. Exigent circumstances is a doctrine that is hard to define and must be examined on a case by case basis.
In the California Appellate Court case People vs. Keith Chung, the neighbor of the defendant (Mr. Chung) testified that she called the police after hearing what sounded like a dog whining in pain. The police arrived at Mr. Chung's door, Mr. Chung stated through the door that he had no dogs, but police officers heard a dog whine as though it was in pain. Based on this, the police officers believed that exigent circumstances existed and immediately entered the house without a search warrant and found a dog badly beaten on the patio and a dead dog in the freezer. Both had suffered severe head injuries. The dog found on the patio was so severely injured that he had to be euthanized. The Court stated that the whining of the dog as though it was in pain created an exigent circumstance justifying the officers entering Mr. Chung's home without a search warrant to save the dogs and prevent them from further danger. Mr. Chung, however, still has the option to appeal the case further.
While there are at least two other cases in the U.S. that I know of that are very similar to this, to my knowledge there has been no such decision made by the appellate courts in Florida. I will do further research to confirm this. I hope that Florida Appellate Courts, if faced with this case, would follow the ruling of the California Appellate Court.
In the California Appellate Court case People vs. Keith Chung, the neighbor of the defendant (Mr. Chung) testified that she called the police after hearing what sounded like a dog whining in pain. The police arrived at Mr. Chung's door, Mr. Chung stated through the door that he had no dogs, but police officers heard a dog whine as though it was in pain. Based on this, the police officers believed that exigent circumstances existed and immediately entered the house without a search warrant and found a dog badly beaten on the patio and a dead dog in the freezer. Both had suffered severe head injuries. The dog found on the patio was so severely injured that he had to be euthanized. The Court stated that the whining of the dog as though it was in pain created an exigent circumstance justifying the officers entering Mr. Chung's home without a search warrant to save the dogs and prevent them from further danger. Mr. Chung, however, still has the option to appeal the case further.
While there are at least two other cases in the U.S. that I know of that are very similar to this, to my knowledge there has been no such decision made by the appellate courts in Florida. I will do further research to confirm this. I hope that Florida Appellate Courts, if faced with this case, would follow the ruling of the California Appellate Court.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Devistating Consequences of the Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico
The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill that occurred in the Gulf of Mexico on April 22, 2010 due to an explosion caused by the collapse of a drilling platform 50 miles off the coast of Louisiana and Mississippi has released thousands gallons of oil and continues to spill approximately 42,000 gallons of oil per day coming from a well nearly a mile deep. The U.S. Coast Guard has been using robot subs to try to stop the spill. The oil spill has spread approximately 1800 square feet and has decimated the marine ecosystem in the Gulf Coast possibly making this one of the biggest oil spill disasters in history.
As of May 3, 2010, scientists predict that the oil may continue to gush for another week or even longer. The oil is currently 20-30 miles offshore. Not only has the massive oil spill hurt the fishing industry and poses a tremendous threat to tourism, but thousands of marine animals, including sea turtles, many of which are endangered, are washing ashore. More than 400 species of wildlife are threatened by the spill, including birds, sea turtles, marine mammals, fish, oysters and other creatures. The animals threatened most by the spill are bluefin tuna, sea turtles, brown pelicans, shrimp and sharks. Bluefin tuna, which are currently in the middle of their spawning season, and some species of sea turtles and sharks are extremely endangered and were just discussed in detail at the most recent CITES meeting regarding the protection of endangered species (which did not end positively for marine animals).
Other animals besides marine animals are being affected because of the oil spill. The Gulf Coast is home to a vast variety of birds. According to Ocean Conservancy, one of the biggest disasters that have occurred because of the oil spills is the effect the spill has had on birds. As of April 30, 2010, the American Bird Conservancy released a list of bird sites most immediately threatened by the ongoing oil spill. The sites previously had been designated Globally Important Bird Areas by the organization, and they are directly in the path of the advancing oil slick. Due to the migratory habits of the birds, birds will be affected as far north as Canada and Alaska and as far south as South America. Several birds affected, injured and killed as a result of the oil spill are threatened, endangered and on the U.S. Watchlist of Birds of Conservation Concern, which can be found http://www.abcbirds.org/abcprograms/science/watchlist/index.html.
Marine biologists and volunteers are finding birds on the shores covered with oil and are quickly trying to clean them and provide them with much needed medical attention. Spring is the worst time this catastrophe could have happened due in part to the face that certain songbirds are going through their peak migratory season and are in the Gulf Coast area and this is also the time that many other species of birds are nesting and laying eggs. Oil seeps into birds' feathers and impairs body insulation, exposing them to cold and making it difficult for them to move. They also wind up ingesting oil, which tears up their digestive tracks.
Manatees also face extreme risk. They are already listed as endangered species under the Endangered Species Act and are also protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Five hundred manatees were killed over this past winter due to incredibly low temperatures. At this time of year, manatees are widely spread thought the coasts of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida. Manatees are also vegetarians, and seagrass beds and other vegetation can be extremely damaged by oil which would cause significant injury or death to the manatees that feed on this vegetation. For more information on Manatees, please visit Save the Manatee Club at http://www.savethemanatee.org/default.html.
One of the most serious consequences of the oil spill is the impact it has had on sea turtles, which are coming close to shore this time of year to lay their eggs onshore. As of May 3, 2010, the Institute for Marine Mammal Studies in Gulfport, Mississippi have already collected 20 dead sea turtles just in the past two or three days. The necropsies of the sea turtles have began May 3, 2010. The world's most endangered sea turtle, the Kemp's Ridley, only nests in the western Gulf. One of their major feeding grounds is in the area of the oil spill, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
This is more than likely only the beginning of the devastation to the environment and thousands of species as a result of the oil spill. The complexity of the Gulf Coastline, with all of its bays, inlets, marshes, estuaries and creeks, will make the cleanup extremely difficult. Scientists say that the full extent of the damage to marine animals and wildlife caused by the spill won’t be realized until the oil washes ashore.
The problem now arising is where to house the marine animals and wildlife that were injured as a result of the oil spill. Obviously, scientists and veterinarians need to be on hand to ensure the animals are treated for medical conditions and are properly recovering. The biggest obstacles facing housing the recovering animals is finding facilities equipped and of sufficient size to accommodate the animals and how housing and recovery process will be funded.
On May 3, 2010, BP has publically stated that they will pay for the cost of the cleanup (which, of course, they should assume full responsibility); however, the taxpayers are still going to have to assist in funding the cleanup and the aid to the animals. As of May 2, 2010, three states (including Florida) have requested thousands of National Guard troops to assist with the cleanup. This disaster has obviously illustrated why drilling should not be allowed in the Gulf, or anywhere else close to shorelines among so many species.
Hopefully, this will be a lesson to politicians that oil drilling in our oceans isn’t worth the cost to the environment or the cost to taxpayers.
For up-to-date blogs on the oil spill disaster and for more detailed information, please visit the Greenpeace website at http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/
As of May 3, 2010, scientists predict that the oil may continue to gush for another week or even longer. The oil is currently 20-30 miles offshore. Not only has the massive oil spill hurt the fishing industry and poses a tremendous threat to tourism, but thousands of marine animals, including sea turtles, many of which are endangered, are washing ashore. More than 400 species of wildlife are threatened by the spill, including birds, sea turtles, marine mammals, fish, oysters and other creatures. The animals threatened most by the spill are bluefin tuna, sea turtles, brown pelicans, shrimp and sharks. Bluefin tuna, which are currently in the middle of their spawning season, and some species of sea turtles and sharks are extremely endangered and were just discussed in detail at the most recent CITES meeting regarding the protection of endangered species (which did not end positively for marine animals).
Other animals besides marine animals are being affected because of the oil spill. The Gulf Coast is home to a vast variety of birds. According to Ocean Conservancy, one of the biggest disasters that have occurred because of the oil spills is the effect the spill has had on birds. As of April 30, 2010, the American Bird Conservancy released a list of bird sites most immediately threatened by the ongoing oil spill. The sites previously had been designated Globally Important Bird Areas by the organization, and they are directly in the path of the advancing oil slick. Due to the migratory habits of the birds, birds will be affected as far north as Canada and Alaska and as far south as South America. Several birds affected, injured and killed as a result of the oil spill are threatened, endangered and on the U.S. Watchlist of Birds of Conservation Concern, which can be found http://www.abcbirds.org/abcprograms/science/watchlist/index.html.
Marine biologists and volunteers are finding birds on the shores covered with oil and are quickly trying to clean them and provide them with much needed medical attention. Spring is the worst time this catastrophe could have happened due in part to the face that certain songbirds are going through their peak migratory season and are in the Gulf Coast area and this is also the time that many other species of birds are nesting and laying eggs. Oil seeps into birds' feathers and impairs body insulation, exposing them to cold and making it difficult for them to move. They also wind up ingesting oil, which tears up their digestive tracks.
Manatees also face extreme risk. They are already listed as endangered species under the Endangered Species Act and are also protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Five hundred manatees were killed over this past winter due to incredibly low temperatures. At this time of year, manatees are widely spread thought the coasts of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida. Manatees are also vegetarians, and seagrass beds and other vegetation can be extremely damaged by oil which would cause significant injury or death to the manatees that feed on this vegetation. For more information on Manatees, please visit Save the Manatee Club at http://www.savethemanatee.org/default.html.
One of the most serious consequences of the oil spill is the impact it has had on sea turtles, which are coming close to shore this time of year to lay their eggs onshore. As of May 3, 2010, the Institute for Marine Mammal Studies in Gulfport, Mississippi have already collected 20 dead sea turtles just in the past two or three days. The necropsies of the sea turtles have began May 3, 2010. The world's most endangered sea turtle, the Kemp's Ridley, only nests in the western Gulf. One of their major feeding grounds is in the area of the oil spill, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
This is more than likely only the beginning of the devastation to the environment and thousands of species as a result of the oil spill. The complexity of the Gulf Coastline, with all of its bays, inlets, marshes, estuaries and creeks, will make the cleanup extremely difficult. Scientists say that the full extent of the damage to marine animals and wildlife caused by the spill won’t be realized until the oil washes ashore.
The problem now arising is where to house the marine animals and wildlife that were injured as a result of the oil spill. Obviously, scientists and veterinarians need to be on hand to ensure the animals are treated for medical conditions and are properly recovering. The biggest obstacles facing housing the recovering animals is finding facilities equipped and of sufficient size to accommodate the animals and how housing and recovery process will be funded.
On May 3, 2010, BP has publically stated that they will pay for the cost of the cleanup (which, of course, they should assume full responsibility); however, the taxpayers are still going to have to assist in funding the cleanup and the aid to the animals. As of May 2, 2010, three states (including Florida) have requested thousands of National Guard troops to assist with the cleanup. This disaster has obviously illustrated why drilling should not be allowed in the Gulf, or anywhere else close to shorelines among so many species.
Hopefully, this will be a lesson to politicians that oil drilling in our oceans isn’t worth the cost to the environment or the cost to taxpayers.
For up-to-date blogs on the oil spill disaster and for more detailed information, please visit the Greenpeace website at http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
