Tag Archive: war on animals


Wow, I knew if I lived long enough I would agree with Prince Charles on something, and it seems we agree that there is an implacable war against animals, a world war on a global scale, starkly evident in the high-tech poaching industry that is wiping out species such as rhinos and elephants before our eyes (see, for instance, my posts here and here). It seems we also agree that the human assault on other animals ought to be viewed as and treated as a war in which we defend animals from attack by any means necessary on this dying planet (see, for instance, my posts here and here). 

Nice to be in agreement with you on these points, Prince Charles. Now how about putting the UK’s armed forces in the service of wildlife under attack?

****************************************************

The Guardian, May 21, 2013

Princes Charles and Prince William

Prince Charles and Prince William examine confiscated items made from endangered animals at the conference.

Prince Charles has warned that criminal gangs are turning to animal poaching, an unprecedented slaughter of species that can only be stopped by waging war on the perpetrators, in the latest of a series of increasingly outspoken speeches about the environment.

Addressing a conference of conservationists at St James’s Palace in London, the Prince of Wales announced a meeting of heads of state to take place this autumn in London under government auspices to combat what he described as an emerging, militarised crisis.

“We face one of the most serious threats to wildlife ever, and we must treat it as a battle – because it is precisely that,” said Charles. “Organised bands of criminals are stealing and slaughtering elephants, rhinoceros and tigers, as well as large numbers of other species, in a way that has never been seen before. They are taking these animals, sometimes in unimaginably high numbers, using the weapons of war – assault rifles, silencers, night-vision equipment and helicopters.”

It is the second outspoken speech that Charles has made this month, at a time when he is taking on an increasing number of monarchical duties, after he told a group of forest scientists also at St James’s Palace that corporate lobbyists and climate change sceptics were turning the Earth into a “dying patient”. The Prince of Wales warned that iconic species – which could include rhinoceros, tigers, orangutans and others – could be extinct in the wild within a decade if efforts to protect them were not stepped up. “By urgent, I mean urgent,” he told the dignitaries, who included governmental and United Nations officials as well as NGOs and grassroots activists.

His son, the Duke of Cambridge, added to the plea: “My fear is that one of two things will stop the illegal trade: either we take action to stem the trade, or we will run out of the animals. There is no other outcome possible.”

Charles also stressed the need to deal with the demand for exotic species. In the past, much of the market for tiger parts, rhino horns and ivory was said to be driven by beliefs in traditional Chinese medicine, in which the rare animal parts were believed to have curative or aphrodisiac properties. But the prince dismissed such ideas, saying the trade was in fact about status symbols rather than belief systems. “The bulk of the intended use is no longer for products that can be classified as traditional medicines. Instead, many more people in rapidly growing economies are seeking exotic products that reflect their economic prosperity and status.”

The conference called for celebrities to publicise their outrage and opposition to the trade, and for young people in countries such as China to be educated to reject the demands of their parents for such status-fuelled goods.

A disturbing update from the front lines of the war on animals, with elephants and rhinos the principle targets, certainly in Africa, and headed rapidly for extinction. A new study described below confirms one’s fears that the inexplicable fetish for ivory, its high monetary value aside, still principally driven by Chinese market demand (the same country also in midst of revolutionary change in its views toward animals reflected in scores of liberations of cats and dogs headed for slaughter and rise in animal advocacy generally).

There is no measure too costly, no action too extreme, no coordinated effort too large to stop this escalating holocaust of  rhinos and elephants, It is clearly high time to defend these majestic animals by any means necessary by shutting down lines of demand and supply, through a ruthless counter-war on poachers, via draconian penalties for consumers and peddlers of ivory, through drone attacks on crime syndicates descending from helicopters for their unconscionable kill, and with crackdowns on state complacency or complicity anywhere in Africa and Asia.

This is a dramatic window into the sixth extinction crisis in the history of the planet unfolding before our eyes; may we do more than watch this continuing saga of rhinos and elephants dropped by guns and machetes until all are wiped off the continent, with nothing remaining of their millions of years of evolution but macabre carvings and statues and graveyards.

The articles linked below are well worth reading, and anyone who doubts the vicious and implacable greed and violence driving the war on elephants and rhinos should read through the valuable New York Times archives.

v

Jaymi Heimbuch, Tree Hugger, January 17, 2013

If you’ve been following ivory poaching in the news lately, you may be wondering if there is any hope at all for elephants.

Just yesterday, the Washington Post reported, “Custom officials seized 638 pieces of illegal elephant ivory estimated to be worth $1.2 million at Kenya’s main port, evidence of what wildlife officials described Wednesday as a growing threat to East Africa’s elephants.”

And just two weeks ago, on January 5, eleven elephants were killed in one massacre by a gang of poachers at Bisadi area of Tsavo East National Park.

The problem is vast and complex, but part of the reason for the growing crisis is the booming economy in China. As the BBC reports:

“China is the main buyer of ivory in the world,” said Dr Esmond Martin, a conservationist and researcher who has spent decades tracking the movement of illegal ivory around the world. He has recently returned from Nigeria, where he conducted a visual survey of ivory on sale in the city of Lagos. His findings are startling.Dr Martin and his colleagues counted more than 14,000 items of worked and raw ivory in one location, the Lekki Market in Lagos.

The last survey, conducted at the same market in 2002, counted about 4,000 items, representing a three-fold increase in a decade.

It is enough to make us wonder if there is any possibility of saving elephants as a species in the face of such rampant killing and rising demand for ivory. Save the Elephants, a prominent nonprofit working to bring attention to poaching issues and Africa’s elephants, just released a 14-year study of elephants in northern Kenya, concluding that adult elephants are more likely to be killed by humans than to die from natural causes.

Science Magazine reports,

“Clearly it is the most detailed and comprehensive demographic analysis undertaken for any elephant population, and perhaps any wildlife population, at least in Africa,” says Norman Owen-Smith, an ecologist at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa. It provides a base “for modeling the potential impacts of increased poaching” on other African elephant populations, which are also suffering from illegal killing.

The study notes that in 2000, there were 38 males over 30 years old in the study population, but by 2011 there were just 12, with seven males maturing into that age group. That means only five of the original 38 males over 30 years old were still alive 11 years after the study began. And by the same year, 56% of the elephants found dead (and few elephant carcasses are actually found) had been poached.

The rise in poaching is not only a concern of conservationists, but also tour operators. The loss of elephants in Kenya means a loss of revenue for people running sight-seeing and safari tours. And the businesses are responding to events like the massacre in Tsavo East National Park. AllAfrica reported this week, “The umbrella body Kenya Association of Tour Operators wants a new wildlife bill to be drafted and the government to take major steps to address the poaching menace.”


After National Geographic’s impressive expose, Blood Ivory, a renewed attention has been brought to the serious issue of poaching, a problem on the rise and reaching a disturbing level of intensity as Save the Elephants has proven with their study.

But there is a glimmer of hope. Elephants have proven that they can recover their numbers if given a chance. The elephants studied by Save the Elephants experienced a small baby boom after the intense poaching of the 70s and 80s lessened.

However, the renewed pressure of poaching has stopped that rebuilding of numbers, and could have a long-term impact on the species, with the loss of important information passed down from older generations of elephants to younger generations, including where to find water, food, and other vital resources in a harsh landscape.

In a recent conversation with National Geographic, Iain Douglas-Hamilton notes that losing older elephants means the loss of the “memory bank” and a lower potential for survival for younger elephants:

Studies elsewhere in Africa show that families which lose large numbers of matriarchs do much less successfully in later life. They have a low survival rate. In the time of drought, for example, the really smart and experienced matriarchs may take their families to a completely different place, only because they’re experienced. Maybe they remember their mothers took them to a place like that when they were young. That means sometimes that they have to take a counterintuitive decision. Like maybe in a really drought-stricken area you’d have to go deeper into the worst area to get through to the other side. That’s actually happened in Tarangire, as reported in a study which showed that the really old matriarchs knew what to do. Young elephants tend to have a higher rate of survival if they have good leadership.

So, are elephants doomed? The fact is, there is hope. There is always hope. But unless something changes, and fast, to protect elephants from poaching, that hope is dying with the older generations of elephants.

The New York Times has created a landing page for all their stories on the ivory trade, making it easy to explore the issue.

*********************************

Also see:

The Elephant Killing Fields

Vatican Stand on Religious Use of Ivory Would Help Slow Illegal Killings of Elephants

Environment News Service, January 14, 2013

CAPE TOWN, South Africa – Record rhino poaching death statistics released by the South African government Friday reveal a grim picture – 668 rhinos lost their lives to poachers in 2012 – up from 14 rhinos killed by poachers in 2005. Conservation scientists report that corrupt game industry insiders are now poaching rhinos alongside other criminal groups – all well organized, well financed and highly mobile.

20130116-232050.jpg
Rhino horns taken from a carcass

The 668 rhinos killed across South Africa in 2012 is an increase of nearly 50 percent from the 448 rhinos poachers killed in 2011. Five more rhinos were killed by poachers just since the beginning of this year.

A 2012 report by the international wildlife trade monitoring network TRAFFIC, calls these rhino killings “an unprecedented conservation crisis for South Africa,” which until recently has had a stellar rhino conservation record.

TRAFFIC is a strategic alliance of the global conservation group WWF and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, IUCN, which maintains the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

The methods used in the most recent rhino killings show a new, very worrying dimension, says the TRAFFIC report, “The South Africa – Viet Nam Rhino Horn Trade Nexus,” co-authored by Dr. Jo Shaw, rhino co-ordinator with the South Africa chapter of WWF, and Tom Milliken of TRAFFIC.

“Typically, rhinos are killed by shooting with guns, usually AK-47 assault rifles. More recently, however, a growing number of rhinos have been killed by a single shot from a high-calibre weapon characteristically only used by wildlife industry professionals or, less frequently, have been darted with immobilization drugs and had their horns removed,” Shaw and Milliken report.

“The use of such equipment, and other evidence that has even suggested the presence of helicopters at crime scenes, represents a completely “new face” in terms of rhino poaching,” they write.

“Such developments underscore the emergence of corrupt game industry insiders into rhino poaching. Rogue game ranch owners, professional hunters, game capture operators, pilots and wildlife veterinarians have all entered the rhino poaching crisis and become active players,” write Shaw and Milliken.

“This is a unique and devastating development in South Africa, severely tarnishing the image of a key stakeholder in the rhino equation even if the majority of private rhino owners and wildlife industry personnel remain committed to protecting rhinos and supporting rhino conservation.”

A majority of the 2012 rhino deaths, 425, happened in Kruger National Park, South Africa’s premier safari destination, the new government statistics show. Poaching incidents in this park rose sharply from 252 in 2011.

In the TRAFFIC report, Show and Milliken write, “…the complicity of South African national and provincial officials undertaking or enabling illegal trade has been documented.”

“In terms of killing rhinos, four government rangers were arrested in Kruger National Park in 2012 and, at the Atherstone Nature Reserve in Limpopo, the reserve manager committed suicide after allegedly being implicated in five rhino deaths. Provincial administrators have repeatedly turned a blind eye to “pseudo-hunting,” especially in North West and Limpopo provinces, and allowed rhino hunts to transpire that violate TOPS [Threatened or Protected Species] regulations,” the TRAFFIC report states.”

20130116-232501.jpg

A White Rhino, Ceratotherium simum simum, cow and calf

“The most shocking aspect of the illegal trade in rhino horn has been the poaching of live rhinos on a brutal scale. For 16 years, between 1990 and 2005, rhino poaching losses in South Africa averaged 14 animals each year.”

“In 2008, this figure rose to 83 and, by 2009, the number had reached 122 rhinos. In 2010, poaching escalated dramatically throughout the year, nearly tripling the toll and reaching 333 rhinos killed. In 2011, the total again climbed to a new annual record of 448 rhinos lost,” they report. Last year, 668 rhinos were killed across South Africa.

Arrests of suspected poachers and smugglers in South Africa also increased in 2012, with 267 people now facing charges related to rhino crimes.

In November, a Thai man was sentenced to a record 40 years in prison for conspiring to smuggle rhino horns to Asia.

Rhino horns are believed to have medicinal properties and are seen as highly desirable status symbols in some Asian countries, notably Vietnam, whose native rhinos have recently been pushed into extinction.

While rhino horn is composed entirely of keratin, the same substance as hair and nails, and no medicinal value has been proven, the increased commercial value placed on rhino horn has drawn well-organized, well-financed and highly-mobile criminal groups into rhino poaching.

“Vietnam must curtail the nation’s rhino horn habit, which is fueling a poaching crisis in South Africa,” said Sabri Zain, TRAFFIC’s director of advocacy.

“Viet Nam appears to be the only country in the world where rhino horn is popularly gaining a reputation as an aphrodisiac,” the TRAFFIC report states, adding that the use of ground powdered rhino horn by wealthy Vietnamese to detoxify after drinking too much alcohol is “probably the most common routine usage promoted in the marketplace today.”

“Rhinos are being illegally killed, their horns hacked off and the animals left to bleed to death, all for the frivolous use of their horns as a hangover cure,” said Zain.

20130116-233110.jpg

Vietnamese man drinks from a rhino horn grinding bowl

In December, Vietnam and South Africa signed an agreement aimed at bolstering law enforcement and tackling illegal wildlife trade, including rhino horn trafficking.

The agreement paves the way for improved intelligence information sharing and joint efforts by the two nations to crack down on the criminal syndicates behind the smuggling networks.

“Whilst we commend South Africa and Vietnam for signing a Memorandum of Understanding regarding biodiversity conservation, we now need to see a joint Rhino Plan of Action being implemented, leading to more of these rhino horn seizures,” said Dr. Jo Shaw, rhino co-ordinator with the South Africa chapter of WWF.

“There is also an urgent need to work closely with countries which are transit routes for illicit rhino horn, specifically Mozambique,” said Dr. Shaw.

Two Vietnamese men were detained in separate incidents earlier this month in Vietnam and Thailand for smuggling rhino horns, which were believed to have been exported from Mozambique.

Both Mozambique and Vietnam have been given failing grades by WWF’s Wildlife Crime Scorecard for failing to enforce laws meant to protect rhinos.

The TRAFFIC report explains that all animals alive today of the southern subspecies of White Rhinoceros Ceratotherium simum simum originate from a remnant population of 20 to 50 animals that have been protected in South Africa’s Hluhluwe-iMfolozi Game Reserve since 1895.

South Africa now conserves 18,800 White Rhinos, which represents nearly 95 percent of Africa’s total White Rhino population.

“The remarkable recovery of the Southern White Rhino via Natal Parks Board’s “Operation Rhino,” which pioneered wildlife translocation and other important management strategies, remains one of the world’s greatest conservation triumphs,” write Shaw and Milliken.

The report credits the country’s private sector who account for a growing proportion of the national White Rhino population. Estimates from 2010 indicate that approximately 25 percent of all White Rhinos in South Africa are privately owned.

The Southern White Rhino is now listed in the IUCN Red List’s Near Threatened category and, although conservation dependent, the subspecies is no longer regarded as a threatened or endangered species.

But Africa’s other rhino species, the Black Rhinoceros Diceros bicornis, has been nearly wiped out. The estimated 100,000 Black Rhinos in Africa in 1960, before the first catastrophic rhino poaching crisis, were reduced to just 2,410 animals by 1995, the report explains.

Since then, numbers have more than doubled to 4,880 animals in 2010, but this species is still listed as Critically Endangered in the IUCN Red List.

In South Africa, Black Rhino numbers have shown a steady increase since the 1980s. South Africa now conserves an estimated 1,915 Black Rhinos – more than any other range state – and nearly 40 percent of all wild Black Rhinos alive today. Again, the private sector has played a major role in Black Rhino conservation, holding approximately 22 percent of South Africa’s current population.

“But the country’s superlative conservation record of more than a century is under threat,” write Shaw and Milliken.

They recommend that South Africa ensure that those arrested for rhino crimes are prosecuted and punished.

**********************************************************************************

See Also:

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/kenyan-officials-impound-two-tonnes-ivory-police-185942068.html

http://www.bloodyivory.org

An informative and disturbing documentary on the war on South African rhinos and economic markets, mythologies, crime syndicates, government corruption, high-tech massacre technologies, and vicious mercenaries driving the immanent extinction of this magnificent species. The urgency of the crisis is vividly dramatized, as are the violent urges deep in the human condition, and the armed struggle taking place right now in Africa and elsewhere in the struggle to save animals from extinction and as a vital part of the politics of nature.

********************************************

Al Jazeera Correspondent

“It’s a creature from a bygone age, older than mankind itself. Greed and corruption, myth and superstition, had brought the rhino to the brink of extinction.

For millenia its best protection, the rhino’s horn is now its worst enemy. If the killing doesn’t stop than the last rhino in the wild could disappear in just a few years.

These days rhino poachers come by a helicopter armed with powerful tranquilizers and a chainsaw. The cruelty of the attack is just breathtaking. A philosopher once said that we can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals. If so what kind of men are doing this?

In 2010 more than 300 rhinos were killed for their horns. With acts of such heartless cruelty taking place every day now, that annual total will almost double in 2012. It amounts to the wholesale slaughter of one of this continent’s most praised natural assets, by means both crude and sophisticated.”

Italian Facebook Steve Best Rome Lecture Tour Event Page

Per Animalia Veritas Steve Best Event Page

“Interview with Steve Best,” Asinus Novus

“Steve Best in Italy: From Philosophy to Action,” by the blog (and more), Asinus Novus. The writers provided a nice summary of my talks and main ideas.

A Key Meeting,” Arielvegangfashinblogspot.com; a refreshingly intelligent, fair, and incisive essay on my work, thank you Ariel.

“Now Enough,” Barbara Balsalmo

 

***************************************************************************

I wish to thank everyone in Italy for inviting me to speak again this year, and for being such gracious hosts, fantastic activists. and amazing people. There are dozens, perhaps over a hundred of people who made this tour possible and joyful. I cannot possibly name them all. I do however, wish to offer a very special thank you to:

Kostia Troinia and Barbara Balsamo for inviting me and being the principal organizers of my talks in Rome. You are the best!

Marcos Aragao for your excellent photos.

VeggieChannel.com for your tremendous effort in interviewing me, taping my lectures in Turin, Rome, and Latina, and for having the courage to post my talks on your channel.

The kind women at Asinus Novus for showing enough interest in my work to summarize my talks and interview me; it was a pleasure, thank you.

Per Animalia Veritas; thank you for your activism, support, and bold defense of militant direct action!

The ReWild Cruelty Free Club; you guys rock and make the best vegan food!

Paolo Trono and his club, Vegan Città di Latina (a former abattoir transformed into a space for music, lectures, and culture!) in which I gave my final speech in the Rome area before moving north to Brescia; thank you for your kindness, the great audience, and the great free food and beer!

Piercarlo Paderno for inviting and hosting me in Brescia. You are a great new friend and did amazing work to help liberate the Greenhill dogs.

The Occupy Greenhill movement (see here and here) for their bold act of liberation that will go down in history as one of the most important actions of this century. In their post-Greenhill reorganization, the group is now called Animal Amnesty, and will keep opening chained fences and locked doors!

A powerful speech on pathological humanism, the escalating war on animals, and its suicidal and destructive consequences.

quwnn

A good overview of the viciousness and pervasiveness of speciesist violence and domination in modern society, as the animal holocaust that began ten thousand years ago with the transition to agricultural society — indeed, which dates back 60,000 years or more perhaps with the invention of the spear and organized hunting of megafauna that resulted in the extinction of the major large land animals in prehistory.

Unfortunately, this minor catalogue of horrors reported below represents but a drop of  pain in an ocean of suffering. To even list the infinitely varied ways in which twisted human minds sadistically and unconscionably torture, exploit, and murder every animal it can would itself take volumes.

But the evidence presented here is damning enough to convict Homo sapiens of being sociopathically violent, disturbed and deranged, and unfit for co-habitation with creatures more beautiful and worthy than them and for life on a planet whose stunning beauty cannot withstand the hideous human soul, the pernicious parasites and multiplying monstrosities whose immanent demise would be cause for planetary joy and celebration.

********************************************

by Jonathan Reynolds

The exploitation of non-human animals is prominent within nearly every country on earth. However, unlike issues such as gender or racial equality, non-human animal welfare seems to be one of the most invisible forms of oppression quietly and consistently operating in the background of society.

Being born human hardly grants us the moral authority to subject other sentient creatures beyond the realm of our species to cruel experimentation, brutal traditions, and a life of involuntary servitude for our mere entertainment.

Non-human animals have been routinely subjected to the worst kinds of scientific experiments.

For instance, in 1944, toxicologist John D. Draize invented the Draize Test, which was used to evaluate the risks of human exposure to cosmetics. The procedure involved applying a small amount of the substance being studied to an animal’s eye (usually rabbits) or skin for several hours, and then observing whether irritation occurred. In most cases, regardless of the results (blindness, infection, pain, or nothing at all), the animal subjects were put to death upon completion of the test.

In 1946, pigs, goats, guinea pigs, rats, and mice were placed on the lower and upper decks of US-owned naval vessels in the Pacific. Shortly after, an atomic bomb was set off nearby. Roughly 2-3 days later, most of the animals involved exhibited cases of anorexia, bloody diarrhea, and extreme irritability. Lesions observed during autopsy were of three types: hemorrhagic, infective, and degenerative, resulting in ulcers of the gastro-intestinal tract and tonsils.

Eleven years later, pigs were unloaded off trucks into the desert and subjected to a nearby atomic bomb blast. The lucky ones quickly perished, while the less fortunate who managed to survive were fatally burned and sickened by large doses of radiation, left to suffer slow, agonizing deaths.

During the 1960′s, tobacco companies used animals in experiments to instill doubt in consumers by delaying and confusing links between their products and cancer. In one experiment, nearly 20 dogs (Beagles) were trained to smoke up to 12 cigarettes a day. Within the first two weeks, the dogs began suffering from a variety of ailments. Eventually, autopsies revealed that the dogs had slight changes in the tissue around their lungs, with advanced cancer cells present.

During the mid 1970′s, monkeys were trained by the US military to manipulate a joystick by maintaining a constant positioning of it to simulate the operation of an aircraft. Then, to determine their efficiency while flying “under attack,” the animals were subjected to medium and larges doses of radiation. According to the military’s report, the monkeys demonstrated mouthing, retching, and productive emesis (vomiting).

Throughout the 1980′s, about 19,000 dogs, rabbits, pigs, ferrets, rats and mice were butchered during various automobile safety tests performed by General Motors. Experiments resulted in skin shredding, chest injury, and polluting of the lungs via auto emissions.

More recently, in 2006, the New York Times reported that the military regularly traumatizes animals to prepare medics for combat. Said one officer: “The idea is to work with live tissue. You get a pig and you keep it alive. And every time I did something to help him, they would wound him again. So you see what shock does, and what happens when more wounds are received by a wounded creature. My pig? They shot him twice in the face with a 9-millimeter pistol, six times with an AK-47, and then twice with a 12-gauge shotgun. And then he was set on fire. I kept him alive for 15 hours. That was my pig.”

In 2009, USA Today reported that military researchers dressed live pigs in body armor, strapped them into Humvee simulators, and then detonated them with explosives to study the link between roadside bomb blasts and brain injury.

What would the public’s reaction be if it were one day leaked that the military kidnapped random people, loaded them on to boats, and then detonated a thermonuclear weapon nearby to test the outcome? How would we feel if certain individuals were treated like lifeless dummies, forcefully subjected by auto companies to brutal car crashes? Would we be okay with strapping human babies to Humvee simulators and then blowing them up? Obviously, such ideas would be out of the question, which is exactly the reason why non-human animals have been used in their place.

Experimenting on other humans without their consent has — at least in recent years – become largely frowned upon in modern societies. Still, such logic is somewhat puzzling. The non-human animals used so often are selected precisely because of their physical and emotional similarities with humans. Like us, they experience fear, pain, and suffering. The only substantial difference between them and us is their lack of humanity, but is that really a justifiable excuse to subject them to such types of of brutal experimentation?

Aside from becoming the victims of scientific testing, non-human animals are needlessly and regularly killed around the world for sport, tradition, and entertainment.

In South Africa, one particularly controversial practice known as “canned hunting” allows hunters to pay for entry to an enclosed area where “trophy animals” — such as lions — are trapped, hunted, and eventually gunned down. The hunter walks away with a rare animal hide to show off, and the “canned hunt” operators walk away with a fatter wallet. Everyone but the slaughtered animal benefits from the exchange.
 
Elsewhere, in places such as Japan, thousands of dolphins are butchered every year under the guise of tradition. Hunters use loud noises to confuse their hypersensitive sonar, drive the dolphins into coves sealed by nets, and then slaughter them with knives and spears. Once all the animals are killed off, their corpses are loaded on to boats and taken to warehouses for processing.

As with dolphin hunting, bullfights are continued today largely because of tradition, even though the practice is perhaps one of the most barbaric on the planet. In 1996, 40 million spectators attended bullfights and bull-related festivals in Spain, with a record 650 fights and 3,900 dead bulls. Essentially, the bull is taunted, slowly weakened with tiny barbs, and finally, after much suffering, stabbed in the heart. Once the bull is killed, the carcass is dragged from the arena, quartered, and dressed. Sometimes the bull’s meat is given to the poor, but usually it is sold on the market.

Whereas bullfighting is human v. non-human, dogfighting is purely non-human v. non-human, and although the practice has been outlawed in most parts of the world, it nonetheless remains popular in Latin America, Pakistan, Eastern Europe, and clandestinely in the U.S. and the United Kingdom. A database run by animal advocacy group Pet-abuse.com shows reports of dogfighting cases increasing from 16 in 2000 to 127 in 2006. The Humane Society of the United States estimates that at least 40,000 people are involved in the industry domestically. Because fight dogs have been bred to attack and kill, almost all of them are euthanized when dogfighting rings are broken apart.

Perhaps the luckiest non-human animals (which isn’t saying much) are those locked away in zoos and circuses for human entertainment. These animals not only tend to be mistreated by their handlers, but the animals themselves often exhibit behaviors unnatural to them, such as depression and hostility, primarily due to being taken out of their natural environments. As reported by the New York Times: “The typical zoo enclosure for a polar bear is one-millionth the size of its home range in the wild, which can reach 31,000 square miles.” Elephants abducted in to the entertainment industry have also become a cause of concern. Linda Huebner, Deputy Director of Advocacy for MSPCA-Angell — a non-profit animal welfare group — writes: “The use of bullhooks and restraints is extremely cruel, causing painful injuries and adding to these animals’ already intense suffering. Moreover, they do not mitigate the huge threat to public safety inherent to forcing large wild animals to perform unnatural tricks in front of large crowds of people.”

The non-human animals which avoid becoming victims of experimentation and needless exploitation will perhaps find themselves born into one of the worst hells imaginable: the industrial farm. In the United States alone, 10 billion land animals are slaughtered every year in feces-crusted, disease-ridden factories which make even the worst Holocaust camp look like Disneyland. Sentient, non-humans spend short lives in such facilities wallowing in painful misery, getting sick and fat with nothing to look forward to except a gruesome death. Most of these places are so horrible that it only takes showing the public what’s inside to drastically lower meat demand, according to researchers at Kansas State University. Perhaps that’s why the meat industry has been lobbying so hard in recent years to increase legal penalties for undercover investigations at these types of establishments.

Not too long ago, there was a point in human history when taking the lives of non-human animals may have been necessary for our survival. In some places around the world, that may even still be the case. But in modern societies, sentient, non-human beings are being needlessly and brutally over-slaughtered in an unrecognized genocide, subjected to torture, suffering, and death for outdated traditions, entertainment, sport, and profit.

Recognizing the indiscriminate cruelty against non-human animals is the first step towards ending it. So long as we remain blind to the ongoing oppression — whether by choice or ignorance — it will continue to take place, and millions of innocent souls will pay the ultimate price as a result.

In April 2012, a California newspaper, the Fresnobee, published a hard-hitting 3-part investigation that documents a little-known, shocking fact: since 1915, the US government Department of Agriculture agency, called Wildlife Services ( a.k.a. Wildlife Damage Management) — which have to be in the top 5 greatest examples of Orwellian doublespeak ever — has embarked on a systematic war of extermination of wildlife deemed to post a threat to agriculture (i.e., cattle raised for food consumption). Not only has this federal agency targeted wolves and coyotes killed by any means necessary — including aerial gunning, trapping, snares, and poisoning — but also many “non-target” animals are killed intentionally or accidentally. Since 2000, the reporter notes, the agency has killed nearly a million coyotes; millions of birds; and a myriad of animals from over 300 other species, including black bears, beavers, porcupines, river otters, mountain lions, and bobcats.  They have also killed tens of thousands of other animals that include protected species such as bald eagles and household dogs.

***********************************************************************

The Killing Agency: Wildlife Services’ Brutal Methods Leave a Trail of Animal Death (Part I)

Tom Knudson, April 29, 2012

The day began with a drive across the desert, checking the snares he had placed in the sagebrush to catch coyotes.

Gary Strader, an employee of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, stepped out of his truck near a ravine in Nevada and

found something he hadn’t intended to kill.

There, strangled in a neck snare, was one of the most majestic birds in America, a federally protected golden eagle.

“I called my supervisor and said, ‘I just caught a golden eagle and it’s dead,’ ” said Strader. “He said, ‘Did anybody see it?’ I said, ‘Geez, I don’t think so.’

“He said, ‘If you think nobody saw it, go get a shovel and bury it and don’t say nothing to anybody.’ “

“That bothered me,” said Strader, whose job was terminated in 2009. “It wasn’t right.”

Strader’s employer, a branch of the federal Department of Agriculture called Wildlife Services, has long specialized in killing animals that are deemed a threat to agriculture, the public and – more recently – the environment.

Since 2000, its employees have killed nearly a million coyotes, mostly in the West. They have destroyed millions of birds, from nonnative starlings to migratory shorebirds, along with a colorful menagerie of more than 300 other species, including black bears, beavers, porcupines, river otters, mountain lions and wolves.

And in most cases, they have officially revealed little or no detail about where the creatures were killed, or why. But a Bee investigation has found the agency’s practices to be indiscriminate, at odds with science, inhumane and sometimes illegal.

The Bee’s findings include:

• With steel traps, wire snares and poison, agency employees have accidentally killed more than 50,000 animals since 2000 that were not problems, including federally protected golden and bald eagles; more than 1,100 dogs, including family pets; and several species considered rare or imperiled by wildlife biologists.

• Since 1987, at least 18 employees and several members of the public have been exposed to cyanide when they triggered spring-loaded cartridges laced with poison meant to kill coyotes. They survived – but 10 people have died and many others have been injured in crashes during agency aerial gunning operations since 1979.

• A growing body of science has found the agency’s war against predators, waged to protect livestock and big game, is altering ecosystems in ways that diminish fbiodiversity, degrade habitat and invite disease.

A coyote killed in a government neck snare. Snares are used extensively by USDA Wildlife Services trappers and have killed more than 150,000 animals since 2006.

Sometimes wild animals must be destroyed – from bears that ransack mountain cabins to geese swirling over an airport runway. But because lethal control stirs strong emotions, Wildlife Services prefers to operate in the shadows.

“We pride ourselves on our ability to go in and get the job done quietly without many people knowing about it,” said Dennis Orthmeyer, acting state director of Wildlife Services in California.

Basic facts are tightly guarded. “This information is Not intended for indiscriminate distribution!!!” wrote one Wildlife Services manager in an email to a municipal worker in Elk Grove about the number of beavers killed there.

And while even the military allows the media into the field, Wildlife Services does not. “If we accommodated your request, we would have to accommodate all requests,” wrote Mark Jensen, director of Wildlife Services in Nevada, turning down a request by The Bee to observe its hunters and trappers in action.

“The public has every right to scrutinize what’s going on,” said Carter Niemeyer, a former Wildlife Services district manager who worked for the agency for 26 years and now believes much of the bloodletting is excessive, scientifically unsound and a waste of tax dollars.

“If you read the brochures, go on their website, they play down the lethal control, which they are heavily involved in, and show you this benign side,” Niemeyer said. “It’s smoke and mirrors. It’s a killing business. And it ain’t pretty.

“If the public knows this and they don’t care, I’m not going to lose any sleep over it,” Niemeyer said. “But they are entitled to know.”

Agency officials say the criticism is misleading. “If we can use nonlethal control first, we usually do it,” said William Clay, deputy administrator of Wildlife Services. “The problem is, generally when we get a call, it’s because farmers and ranchers are having livestock killed immediately. They are being killed daily. Our first response is to try to stop the killing and then implement nonlethal methods.”

In March, two congressmen – Reps. John Campbell, R-Irvine, and Peter DeFazio, D-Ore. – introduced a bill that would ban one of Wildlife Services’ most controversial killing tools: spring-loaded sodium cyanide cartridges that have killed tens of thousands of animals in recent years, along with Compound 1080 (sodium fluoroacetate), a less-commonly used poison.

“This is an ineffective, wasteful program that is largely unaccountable, lacks transparency and continues to rely on cruel and indiscriminate methods,” said Camilla Fox, executive director of Project Coyote, a Bay Area nonprofit.

“If people knew how many animals are being killed at taxpayer expense – often on public lands – they would be shocked and horrified,” Fox said.

The Program’s Origins

A coyote hunts rodents in the Sierra Valley north of Truckee. The animals generally pose little danger to cattle.

Wildlife Services’ roots reach back to 1915, when Congress – hoping to increase beef production for World War I – allocated $125,000 to exterminate wolves, starting in Nevada.

Popular among ranchers, the effort was expanded in 1931 when President Herbert Hoover signed a law authorizing the creation of a government agency – later named the Branch of Predator and Rodent Control – “to promulgate the best methods of eradication, suppression or bringing under control” a wide range of wildlife from mountain lions to prairie dogs.

Federal trappers pursued that mission with zeal. They dropped strychnine out of airplanes, shot eagles from helicopters, laced carcasses of dead animals with Compound 1080 – notorious for killing non-target species – and slaughtered coyotes, wolves, mountain lions and grizzly bears across the West.

Their efforts drew protest and calls for reform.

“The program of animal control … has become an end in itself and no longer is a balanced component of an overall scheme of wildlife husbandry and management,” a panel of scientists wrote in a 1964 report to the U.S. secretary of Interior.

The report was followed by hearings, another critical federal review in 1971, unflattering press and an executive order by President Richard Nixon banning poison for federal predator control. “The time has come for man to make his peace with nature,” Nixon said in a statement at the time.

President Gerald Ford later amended the order to allow the continued use of sodium cyanide.

The killing has continued on a broad scale. In 1999, the American Society of Mammalogists passed a resolution calling on the agency, renamed Wildlife Services in 1997, “to cease indiscriminate, pre-emptive lethal control programs on federal, state and private lands.” Today, the society is considering drafting a new resolution.

“It makes no sense to spend tens of millions of dollars to kill predators, especially in the way that it’s done, to the extent that it’s done, when it can have cascading effects through the ecosystem, unintended consequences and nontarget consequences,” said Bradley Bergstrom, a professor of wildlife biology at Valdosta State University in Valdosta, Ga., and chairman of the society’s conservation committee.

Clay, though, said his agency is more science-based and environmentally sensitive than ever. “We’ve increased the professionalism 100 percent,” he said. “We’ve also emphasized research to more specifically take target animals. And we work very closely with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state wildlife agencies.”

Elizabeth Copper, a Southern California biologist who has worked with Wildlife Services, agreed. She applauded the agency’s work to protect the endangered California least tern from predators in the San Diego area.

“I know the reputation Wildlife Services has and it is particularly inappropriate for the people involved with this program,” said Copper. “They work really hard with a focus for something that is in big trouble. And they’ve made a huge difference.”

Unreported Killings

But elsewhere, the agency’s actions have stirred anger and concern from private citizens, scientists and state and federal fish and game officials.

In 2003, the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources received a tip that a golden eagle – one of the largest birds of prey in North America and a species protected by three federal laws, including the Migratory Bird Treaty Act – was struggling to free itself from a leg-hold trap in the remote Henry Mountains.

Roger Kerstetter – an investigator with the state wildlife division – found the trap, but no eagle. Nearby, though, he spotted feathers poking out of the sand.

“They turn out to be the neck feathers of a golden eagle. And one of them comes out with a .22 bullet attached to it,” Kerstetter recalled.

On the trap was another clue. It was stamped: Property of the U.S. Government.

“At that point, we started doing our homework,” he said.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also joined the investigation. In federal court two years later, a Wildlife Services trapper pleaded guilty to killing the eagle and paid a $2,000 fine.

“We never did find the bird,” Kerstetter said. “He claimed he just buried it.”

Nor did a record of the incident turn up in the agency’s files.

“They are required to report the animals they take accidentally,” Kerstetter said. “This eagle was never reported.”

Strader, the former agency trapper who said he snared and buried an eagle in Nevada, is not surprised.

“That was not the only eagle I snared while working for Wildlife Services,” he said. “I will not say how many. But the one (my supervisor) told me to bury was the first one, and I figured that was what was supposed to be done all the time, so that is what I did.”

Overall, agency records show that 12 golden and bald eagles have been killed by mistake by agency traps, snares and cyanide poison since 2000 – a figure Strader believes is low.

“I would bet my house against a year-old doughnut there were more than 12 eagles taken, way more,” said Strader. “You cannot set a trap, snare or (cyanide poison bait) in habitat occupied by eagles and not catch them on occasion.”

Agency policy instructs trappers “to accurately and completely report all control activities.” But Niemeyer, the retired Wildlife Services manager, said the policy is often ignored.

“Trappers felt that catching non-targets was a quick way to lose the tools of the trade and put Wildlife Services in a bad light,” Niemeyer said.

Asked about the allegations, Deputy Administrator Clay said: “I certainly hope that is not the case. … We track those things so we know what kind of impact we are having on populations and the environment.”

Wildlife Service at work, keeping the American beef supply safe from “predators.”

In all, more than 150 species have been killed by mistake by Wildlife Services traps, snares and cyanide poison since 2000, records show. A list could fill a field guide. Here are some examples:

Armadillos, badgers, great-horned owls, hog-nosed skunks, javelina, pronghorn antelope, porcupines, great blue herons, ruddy ducks, snapping turtles, turkey vultures, long-tailed weasels, marmots, mourning doves, red-tailed hawks, sandhill cranes and ringtails.

Many are off-limits to hunters and trappers. And some species, including swift foxes, kit foxes and river otter, are the focus of conservation and restoration efforts.

“The irony is state governments and the federal government are spending millions of dollars to preserve species and then … (you have) Wildlife Services out there killing the same animals,” said Michael Mares, president of the American Society of Mammalogists. “It boggles the mind.”

One critical loss occurred two years ago when a wolverine, one of the rarest mammals in America, stepped into a Wildlife Services leg-hold trap in Payette National Forest in Idaho. It was the third wolverine captured in agency traps since 2004 (the other two were released alive.)

“Shot wolverine due to bad foot,” the trapper wrote in his field diary, which The Bee obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

“Oh my God, that is unbelievable,” said Wendy Keefover, a carnivore specialist with WildEarth Guardians, an environmental group in Colorado. “Wolverines are a highly endangered mammal. There are very few left. Each individual is important.”

Wildlife Services spokesperson Lyndsay Cole said: “We were surprised at this unfortunate incident. As soon as it occurred, we again worked directly with Forest Service officials to take steps that would prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future.”

And Clay, the deputy administrator, said traps, snares and cyanide are key tools that nearly always get the right species. “Overall, these methods are at least 95 percent effective,” he said.

But environmentalists don’t trust the data.

“There is an enormous amount of pressure not to report non-targets because it makes them look bad,” said Stephanie Boyles Griffin, a wildlife scientist with the Humane Society of the United States.

Many scientists want the collateral damage to stop. “In times when fiscal constraint is demanded, we believe programs that carelessly kill rare species and indiscriminately kill a great diversity of non-target species should be defunded and discontinued,” Mares wrote in a letter to Wildlife Services in March.

The Family Dog

Dog killed by Wildlife Services trap

Raccoons are most often killed by mistake, followed by river otters, porcupines, snapping turtles, javelina, striped skunks and muskrats. But there are other accidental victims that are often more keenly missed: dogs.

One was Maggie, a tail-wagging, toy-fetching border collie-Irish setter mix beloved by Denise and Doug McCurtain and their four children.

Last August, Maggie’s spine was crushed when she stepped into a vise-like “body-grip” trap set by Wildlife Services near the family’s suburban Oregon home to catch a nonnative rodent called a nutria.

“How in the heck can a government agent put a dangerous trap out in a residential neighborhood?” Denise McCurtain said. “It’s absolutely disgusting.”

The family has filed a claim for damages.

“Never once did anyone come to us and apologize,” she said. “It was like they pretended it didn’t happen.”

Maggie, a border collie-Irish setter mix belonging to the McCurtain family, died when her spine was crushed by a vise-like “body-grip” trap set close to their home in suburban Oregon by Wildlife Services.

On average, eight dogs a month have been killed by mistake by Wildlife Services since 2000, records show. Some believe that figure is low, including Rex Shaddox, a former agency trapper in Texas.

“We were actually told not to report dogs we killed because it would have a detrimental effect on us getting funded,” said Shaddox, who worked for the agency in 1979-80 when it was called Animal Damage Control.

“If we were working on a ranch and killing dogs coming in from town, we didn’t report those,” said Shaddox, 56. “We buried them and got the collars and threw them away. That’s how we were taught to do it.”

Clay, the agency deputy administrator, said:

“We’ve got policies that instruct employees that they need to accurately report everything they take. Anybody that’s in violation is dealt with immediately.”

Two years ago, a dog wearing a collar with a rabies tag disappeared in West Virginia. Its worried owners, James and Carol Gardner, contacted the state police. Only then did they learn that Charm, their 11-year-old husky, had been killed and buried by a Wildlife Services trapper trying to poison predators with a spring-loaded “M-44″ cyanide cartridge.

“We were not notified,” said Carol Gardner. “We were very, very, very upset.”

“It’s terrible,” said James, 71. “I think it’s a sin. Our tax dollars are paying for this. It should be mandatory that people are notified.”

Charm, he added, was not just a pet – she was “a member of the family.”

A few days later, he received a letter from Christopher Croson, the agency’s state director.

“I must apologize for my employee’s failure to recognize that a pet owner could be identified using a rabies tag number,” Croson wrote. “This was a most disturbing lack of judgment.”

Today, the Gardners watch for missing-dog notices and call the owners when they see one.

“We notify them that, hey, maybe you’d better call the USDA and see if they buried a dog with your description,” Carol Gardner said. And she added: “Some day it’s going to be a human being, instead of a dog.”

Injuries to People

There have already been close calls. Over the past 25 years, at least 18 employees and several private citizens have been injured by M-44 cyanide cartridges. Here are a few examples from agency records.

From 1987: “We will never know but it is very likely the fact that (the employee) was carrying his antidote kit … may have saved his life.

From 1999: “The cyanide hit the left forearm of the employee, causing (it) to scatter, with some cyanide hitting his face. He started to cough and felt muscle tightness in the back of his neck. The employee used two amyl nitrate antidote capsules. … He used two more amyl nitrate capsules on the way to the clinic. The clinic doctor administered oxygen and two more amyl nitrate capsules. The employee was air-flighted.”

From 2007: “The individual kicked or stepped on the M-44 devices and cyanide was ejected into his eyes. Individual reported that his eyes were irritated and burning.”

Agency officials downplay the risk. “Although use of M-44 devices has resulted in some human exposure reports, most involved program staff and minor or short-term symptoms,” said Carol Bannerman, a Wildlife Services spokeswoman.

“A majority of exposures to members of the public resulted from the involved individual’s disregard of warning and trespass signs or intentional tampering with the devices,” she added.

In 2003, Dennis Slaugh, 69, was hunting for rocks and fossils in Utah when he spotted what he thought was a surveyor’s stake. Curious, he bent down to have a look.

“I just kind of brushed it and it blew up in my face and put cyanide all over me,” said Slaugh, a retired county heavy equipment operator. “I was instantly sick. I was so sick I was throwing up.”

Later, he recovered the M-44, which is engraved with the words, U.S. Government. Slaugh believes it was set by Wildlife Services. The agency denies responsibility.

“If it is stamped ‘U.S. Government,’ it is probably the property of Wildlife Services,” Bannerman said. But she added, “Wildlife Services did not have any M-44 devices set out in the area. … No information or review suggests the validity of the claim. No device had been set there for more than 10 days. An investigation conducted by EPA in 2008 did not find any wrongdoing by Wildlife Services.”

Slaugh said he has not been the same since. “The cyanide hooks to your red blood cells and starves you of oxygen. I can feel that more and more all the time,” he said. “I’m getting real short of breath. I went to the hospital the other day, and they are thinking about putting me on oxygen.”

“It’s awful to put poison out there where people can get it,” he added. “Lots of people’s pets have got (killed). One woman lost her dog a half-mile from where I was at.”

M-44s were banned in California by Proposition 4 in 1998, but Wildlife Services still uses them on American Indian land in Mendocino County.

“Over the past five years, there has been no unintentional take,” said Larry Hawkins, the agency’s California spokesman.

“I’m deeply shocked,” said Fox, who pushed for the M-44 ban as a coordinator with the Animal Protection Institute. “They are a rogue agency that believes they are above the law and can employ their lethal wares wherever they want – regardless of state law.”

Poisoning predators with cyanide is not the agency’s only risky practice. Killing coyotes from low-flying planes and helicopters is, too.

Since 1989, several employees have been injured in crashes and 10 people have died, including two in Utah in 2007, one of them a good friend of Strader, the former agency trapper.

“I went to the funeral,” Strader said. “He was just a real nice guy, funny, joking around all the time. And he got killed for what? To kill a stinking coyote. It don’t make sense.

“We ain’t threatened by coyotes so much that we’ve got to lose peoples’ lives over it,” Strader said.

This plane used by federal Wildlife Services for aerial attacks on wolves, with 58 paw-print decals indicating the number killed, stirred outrage when published on a conservation blog last year. To many, the decals showed callousness toward wildlife. An agency spokesperson apologized, saying the decals were removed when a manager realized they could offend some people. Aerial hunting is one of Wildlife Services’ most popular methods for killing coyotes and wolves.

Concern across California

Other agency records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act reveal for the first time just where the agency kills wildlife, intentionally and accidentally, across California. And in many of those locations, there is conflict and concern.

Inyo County, in the eastern Sierra, is where two Wildlife Services hunters – working under contract with the California Department of Fish and Game – have been tracking and shooting mountain lions to protect an endangered species: the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep.

Becky Pierce, a mountain lion biologist with the state, said the effort has been marred by unnecessary killing, including, in 2009, when a Wildlife Services hunter shot a female mountain lion with kittens.

“They got left to starve, waiting for mom to come back,” she said. “I’m not saying we don’t sometimes have to remove lions if they are (preying) on sheep. But everything should be done in a humane manner. And that isn’t humane.”

Tom Stephenson, who directs the sheep recovery effort for Fish and Game, declined to comment. But Andrew Hughan, a department spokesman, said the kittens may have survived.

“To say that a female lion was taken and her cubs left to die is completely subjective. They are resourceful creatures,” Hughan said.

Pierce, who has studied lions for two decades, disagreed. “They were relying on the mother for milk. It would be a miracle if any of them survived,” she said.

In March 2011, two more mountain lion kittens, just days old, were mauled to death in the Sierra when a Wildlife Services hunter’s dogs raced out of control and pounced on them. Their mother was then shot, too.

“We all want to see bighorn sheep protected,” said Karen Schambach, California field director for Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. “What gives me the greatest angst is how inhumane some of this stuff is. For Wildlife Services to allow dogs to go tear newborn kittens apart is outrageous.”

Hawkins, the agency’s California spokesman, called the incident “a regrettable outcome over which our specialist had no control.”

No mammal draws more agency lethal force in California and the West than the coyote. Records show that most are killed in rural regions, such as Lassen, Modoc and Kern counties, where they are considered a threat to livestock.

“It’s a very valuable program,” said Joe Moreo, agricultural commissioner in Modoc County. “We have very good trappers up here, and we’re fortunate we have them.”

But coyotes are also killed where people like to hear their howls and yips, including Alpine County, south of Lake Tahoe.

Since 2007, Wildlife Services has killed more than 120 coyotes in Alpine County.

“Coyotes are part of our magical landscape,” said John Brissenden, a former county supervisor who manages Sorensen’s Resort along the west fork of the Carson River. “Our primary motivator for people coming here is the wildlife and the outdoors. That’s what our business is built on. It’s what Alpine County’s commerce is built on. To take that away makes no sense.”

Many coyotes were killed in the middle of winter, when they are easier to spot and shoot, including 15 in February 2010. Hawkins, the agency spokesman, said the animals were killed “in the protection of livestock.” Asked where – public land or private? – Hawkins said he didn’t know.

Brissenden would like some answers.

“We are 97 percent state- and federal-owned,” he said. “There is very little grazing here. To have a federal agency eliminate these animals without public review is astonishing and appalling.”

Rare footage of Wildlife Services aerial gunning in 2011, from Lynne Stone, Boulder White Clouds Council, an environmental group in Idaho.

Resources

Part II: Wildlife Services’ deadly force opens Pandora’s box of environmental problems

Part III:  Environmental group sues to halt killing practices of federal wildlife agency

Editorial: Wildlife Services needs a tight leash

Videos

Wildlife Damage Management

http://therightsofanimals.com/montana-accepts-51000-to-fund-wolf-slaughter/

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 618 other followers

%d bloggers like this: