Tell USDA To Do Its Job And Help Elephant Nosey: Please Sign

Comments Off

The USDA has yet again let a chronic violator of federal animal welfare standards get away with little more than a slap on the wrist.

PLEASE  Help save NOSEY A Very lonely Elephant Who Deserves Freedom

Just days before Hugo Liebel was set to face a hearing on March 26, 2013 for 33 violations of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), the USDA announced it had reached a settlement. Instead of revoking Liebel’s license and handing down a maximum penalty of $330,000, the USDA settled with the agreement that Liebel would pay a meagre civil penalty of $7,500 and cease and desist from violating the AWA.

This settlement is a shocking disappointment and a pathetic excuse for government oversight.

For decades, Liebel has blatantly ignored his legal responsibilities and the well being of the elephant Nosey, and other animals he uses for circus shows. The 33 charges described years of mistreatment including failure to provide veterinary care for the weight loss and chronic skin condition of Nosey, chaining her so tightly that she could not move or lie down, and handling her in a way that was dangerous to her and to the public. The charges also included an incident involving a critically endangered spider monkey who escaped and was not recaptured for 10 days.

With your help, IDA has monitored Liebel for years, documenting numerous, flagrant violations of the AWA as he dragged Nosey and other animals around the country to give rides and perform.

IDA submitted multiple complaints with supporting evidence to the USDA, urging the agency to take action to protect Nosey and the public. When the USDA finally filed charges against Liebel in 2011, IDA hoped the agency was finally taking meaningful action to help Nosey. But yet again, the USDA squandered this opportunity to hold Liebel accountable for ignoring the law.

As long as Nosey remains with Liebel, her suffering will continue.

Use the form below to fax Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, who is responsible for ensuring that the agency enforce AWA regulations.

Tell Sec. Vilsack that you are outraged by the USDA’s settlement with Hugo Liebel. Remind Sec. Vilsack that with this settlement, Nosey’s suffering will continue as long as she remains with Liebel. Urge Sec. Vilsack to order the USDA to confiscate Nosey. Then call him, also!

Please visit the following & send the fax:-https://secure2.convio.net/ida/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&page=UserAction&id=2367&JServSessionIdr004=gaqslixzp1.app245b

NOSEY THE ELEPHANT

Published on 2 Oct 2012 – Wendy Michaels

1:14 little movie about NOSEY. On behalf of Nosey let USDA know how you feel:
JUDGE JANICE BULLARD 1-202-720-4443. 1-202-720-9776 (fax)
USDA atty COLLEEN CARROLL colleen.carroll@usda.gov

Please Help Nosey The Elephant

Comments Off

Since 2009, IDA has worked tirelessly on behalf of an elephant named Nosey, who suffers in a variety of travelling circuses at the hands of her exhibitor Hugo Liebel.

With your help, we have documented Nosey’s condition and numerous violations of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) as she was dragged around the country to give rides and perform tricks.

IDA members sent more than 18,000 letters and e-mails to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) urging the agency to help Nosey.

We reported a year ago that the USDA had finally filed charges against Liebel concerning numerous AWA violations for which Liebel had repeatedly been cited between 2007 and 2011. These included safe-handling violations that put Nosey and the public at risk, failure to provide adequate veterinary care, violations of food storage requirements, and unsafe and inadequate conditions in Nosey’s barn, enclosure, and trailer.

Liebel answered these serious charges with a rambling response blaming everyone but himself, without acknowledging any responsibility for the egregious violations. Given Liebel’s history, there is no indication he has any intention of improving his treatment of Nosey.

Liebel continues to haul Nosey around the country, jamming her into a tiny, foul trailer with other animals. Nosey also suffers from a persistent terrible skin condition and is constantly chained, except when giving rides or performing unnatural tricks.

A hearing is scheduled March 26 in Tampa, Florida on the USDA charges. This date was given to us by the Hearing Judge’s office but it has changed once and might change again.

Please help us ensure a positive outcome for Nosey

“Watch this video, the metal frame used to carry the public is put on top of a flimsy old thin rug, then winched into place; like they do with transport carriers, the safety belts are thrown over then manually, winched to tighten them! Can you imagine how that metal frame must dig into Nosey’s back? Her walking looks slow & laboured as if she is in pain from her joints etc. “

Liebel/Liebling Circus with Nosey the elephant in Haines City 

Uploaded on 27 Feb 2010

Liebel Bros Circus with Nosey ( AKA Tiny ) the elephant at the Studio C Dance Studio in Haines City , FL 2-27-2010 with Nosey AKA Tiny AKA Peanut owned by Hugo ( Tom ) Liebel AKA Hugo Bloom

Nosey The Elephant 

Published on 2 Oct 2012 - Wendy Michaels

1:14 little movie about NOSEY. On behalf of Nosey let USDA know how you feel:
JUDGE JANICE BULLARD 1-202-720-4443. 1-202-720-9776 (fax)
USDA atty COLLEEN CARROLL colleen.carroll@usda.gov

Please send a message to Colleen Carroll, who is prosecuting on behalf of the USDA. Thank Carroll for her work on this case and encourage her to press for the maximum available penalties. Please ask Carroll, in the event that Liebel is found to be in violation, to push for the maximum allowable amount of fines and termination of Liebel’s license to exhibit animals.

We don’t want to disrupt Attorney Carroll’s office with emails and faxes, so we’re asking you to please take an extra few minutes to mail her a hard-copy letter instead. Below is a sample letter. Please personalize that model letter or compose your own similar letter and mail to:

Colleen Carroll, Esq.
Office of General Counsel
US Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave., SW
Washington, DC 20250-1400

Sample letter:

Dear Attorney Carroll:

As a supporter of In Defense of Animals (IDA), I am very concerned about the plight of Nosey the elephant, who has been exhibited around the country by Hugo Liebel. Liebel is charged with numerous substantial, wilful violations of the Animal Welfare Act, including repeated non-compliance with veterinary care, handling, housing, and husbandry requirements from 2007 to 2011. If Liebel is found to be in violation on these charges, I urge you to press for the maximum allowable sanctions.

I would also like to express my gratitude for your work on this case to date, particularly your decision to pursue serious charges against Liebel.

The violations charged in the complaint are, as you point out, substantial, and many of them are repeated violations for which Liebel has previously been cited. Many of the violations are allegedly wilful  His documented lengthy record compels the conclusion that Liebel is either unable or unwilling to comply with the laws and regulations put into place to protect exhibited animals and the public.

Therefore, I urge you, in the event that Liebel is found to be in violation on these charges, to press for the maximum allowable sanctions, including the highest possible amount in fines and termination of Liebel’s license to exhibit animals. I see no other way of ensuring the safety of Nosey, the surviving monkey, and any other animals who Liebel could acquire for exhibition.

Again, thank you for your efforts and attention to this serious matter.

Sincerely,

News Link:-http://ida.convio.net/site/MessageViewer?em_id=26641.0&printer_friendly=1

Breaking News – Hope For Nosey!

January 13th, 2012 |  Author: Deborah Robinson

Breaking news – NOSEY: Following many complaints by IDA over the past several years regarding Nosey, the USDA  has filed a Complaint against Nosey’s exhibitor Hugo Liebel alleging numerous willful violations of the Animal Welfare Act. These include repeated noncompliance with the veterinary care, handling, housing and husbandry requirements: in all, some 25 violations over a period from early 2007 to early 2011. These are grave violations, the possible penalties for which include fines and suspension or revocation of Liebel’s license to exhibit animals.

IDA will continue to monitor Nosey’s ongoing care.

For more information about IDA’s work on elephants in circuses, go to www.helpelephants.com.

To support IDA – In Defense of Animals, work please click here.

 http://www.idablog.org/featured/breaking-news-hope-for-nosey/

News Link:-http://asianelephantstoday.com/2012/01/13/ida-new-hope-for-nosey-the-circus-elephant/

“Don’t let Nosey suffer another 10 years of tricks & rides! She needs to be moved now so she can enjoy the rest of her natural life, at PAWS Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee; living as an elephant should…walking freely with other elephants…without shackles…without pain!”

Please sign this petition:-http://www.change.org/petitions/confiscate-nosey-the-elephant-from-the-traveling-circus?utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=url_share&utm_campaign=url_share_before_sign

Federal Government Wants To Ban Sex With Animals (No Graphics)

Comments Off

“Sounds like the Germans don’t like being the animal sex capital anymore!! But don’t be too excited, the part where they say “while it (the animal) bears no injury or death. I don’t know how many times I will have to say this, but anything stuck into a dog apart from another dog can & will cause damage. Even if they do bring it into law, those people who do it are not going to be shouting about it anymore. Plus the animals usually belong to the perverted, so how are people going to know if they have been injured?”

“There should be one law to serve the entire world…No touching animals in any way that may be construed as sexual, no touching, no petting, no oral, no nothing a total ban! But it still won’t stop those who live in isolated areas for that very reason; unless they are forced to make their animal see a vet every 3 months or something like that…not that I’m trying to be negative, I can just see loopholes in a Country where most of the pervs live, partly isolated, due to the stigma already attached!”

Translated from German – FINES TO UP TO 25 000 EURO A

It’s a number that evokes horror: The Berliner Zeitung “BZ” reported that about 10 000 people in Germany regularly sex with animals have!

Bad: Sexual acts with animals (“sodomy”) are not even banned in Germany …

But this is about to change because: The federal government intends to provide sex with animals punishable!

This is what the Animal Welfare Act to be tightenedPreviously sexual acts with animals are punished only if an animal so suffering serious injury or death. In the future, sexual acts of people on animals also be punishable if the animal while it bears no injuries. Sodomy as a criminal offense has been deleted from the 1969 Penal Code.

However, it is still forbidden to spread animal pornographic images.

In the current bill of 29 August 2012 that: “The Federal Government recognizes the fact that sexual activities are suitable to animals by humans, animals regularly inflict suffering at least in terms of animal welfare, as these animals are forced to artwidrigen behavior.”

IN ENGLAND AND SWITZERLAND PUNISHABLE 

In Europe, the sexual contact with animals in England, Wales and Northern Ireland is an offense. In Switzerland, since September 2008, the Animal Protection Law sexually motivated acts with animals expressly forbids.

Federal Agriculture Minister Ilse Aigner (47, CSU) told BILD: “Germany is a leader in animal welfare. The welfare of animals is for the federal government a high priority, so we will bring more improvements on the way. “

Currently there are consultations on the revised law. In the fall to the Bundestag and Bundesrat vote on the law.

After image-information to sodomy punishable by a fine in the future up to 25 000 euros!

CDU legal expert Günter Krings (43) However, it is “embarrassing, if we rise to such a right only amendment with animal health. The moral law and hygiene hazards are for me much more obvious reasons such a ban necessary. “

FDP politician Hans-Michael Goldmann (66) defended the proposed law and clarifies further Goldmann “that we can improve the Animal Welfare Act for the welfare of animals and do not criminal law.”: “It is unacceptable that someone an animal pain and suffering that can lead to behavioral problems can cause, without being prosecuted. With the explicit prohibition of the punishment is facilitated and the protection of the animals increased. “

Thomas Schroeder (47), president of the German Animal Welfare Association, told Bild: “It is totally wrong that showing photos of sodomy is forbidden, the act itself but not yet. Shooter can now be traded. “

 

Tough penalties pledge on animal cruelty

Comments Off

Agriculture Minister Michelle O’Neill has pledged her support for the full use of tougher penalties for animal welfare abuses.

Highlighting the introduction of stiffer pledges under the Welfare of Animals Act 2011, the Sinn Féin Minister said she was “totally committed to protecting and safeguarding animal welfare.”

Anyone found guilty of such offences now faces two years in prison and/or an unlimited fine. The court can also disqualify any person convicted of an animal welfare offence from keeping an animal.

In the past, those convicted faced 3 months’ imprisonment and/or a £5,000 fine. The Minister’s statement came as a result of a debate at Stormont on Monday which was attended by the owners of a pet dog put to sleep following an act of cruelty that stunned the public. Cody the collie was covered in flammable liquid and set on fire close to her family home in Maghaberry, Co Antrim last month.

Despite efforts to try and save her – Cody lost her fight for life. She was put down because the burns to her skin were too severe. Minister O’Neill said: “I believe that the new tough penalties introduced by the 2011 Act will be a strong deterrent to thugs who would carry out such barbaric welfare abuses as the recent Cody case.

“I support the full use of the extended sentences available for serious animal welfare offences to include longer periods of imprisonment to ensure that perpetrators receive a punishment that fits the crime. “I intend to meet the Minister of Justice to ensure that the Courts are encouraged to make full use of the range of penalties available for animal welfare offences and in horrific cases like the Cody case to apply the maximum penalties possible.”

The shocking episode of cruelty has resulted in fresh calls for tougher sentences. The DUP want greater prison sentences made available to the judiciary. Paul Givan MLA, Chair of the Justice Committee, told UTV: “If somebody can attack a defenceless animal like this then we have a concern - what could they do to a human being?”

Ms O’Neill highlighted a recent successful prosecution under the 2011 act. “I am pleased to note that in one of the first cases the PSNI has recently secured a successful prosecution at Downpatrick Magistrates’ Court where a defendant was found guilty of causing unnecessary suffering to a dog under the 2011 Act. The defendant was fined £250 and prohibited from keeping animals for five years.” The minister concluded: “The public should be in no doubt that causing unnecessary suffering, including deliberate acts of cruelty to domestic pets, will not be tolerated and that the perpetrators will be punished.”

Animal welfare charity, the USPCA, has welcomed the Stormont debate. David Wilson, of the charity, said: “It’s 30 years of Cinderella for animal welfare legislation. 2011 saw the new Animal welfare act. 2012 has saw full implementation. We welcome any moves to increase penalties.” Cody’s case is not isolated. A litter of kittens was saved from a group of boys in Londonderry earlier this month, who were trying to set the animals on fire. It is believed some of the children involved in the incident were as young as nine years old.

Mr Wilson says an increase in penalties in itself is not the answer – but increased enforcement is also needed. “By increasing penalties [it] doesn’t actually improve the situation unless we have adequate and proper enforcement.” He said the USPCA attended a meeting recently with their counterparts in Europe and the Commission where the issue of enforcement is being pressed “That would be our message - better enforcement.”stiffer

Video & News Link:-http://www.u.tv/News/Tough-penalties-pledge-on-animal-cruelty/a59d32a9-5891-4de5-8294-b3cb741e2560

240 starving cows killed on farm, New Zealand

Comments Off

 

Animal welfare officers have euthanised 180 cows and calves found starving and near death on a West Coast farm.

The Ministry of Primary Industries is considering laying charges under the Animal Welfare Act over alleged neglect at a leasehold farm in the Lake Brunnerarea.

Not related. Ref. only

An investigator who inspected the farm on August 28 found several cows dead and the rest of the 940-strong herd in “various stages of starvation”.

Local veterinarians, a farm consultant and additional animal welfare officers assessed the cows.

They were found to be in such an emaciated state that they were unlikely to survive more than a few days.

An MPI veterinarian supervised the euthanisation of 150 cows and 30 calves. A further 60 cows were transported to the local freezing works.

There were concerns over the welfare of the 700 cows remaining at the farm, the MPI said.

It said alleged breaches of the Animal Welfare Act 1999 had been carried out at the farm, though no charges had yet been laid.

Federated Farmers West Coast president Katie Milne said the organisation was assisting the MPI investigation.

She implicated financial problems in the failings at the Lake Brunner farm.

“The critical message we need to get out is whatever happens financially you are a farmer first. This is not the 1960′s so be open to your family, your friends and your bank. Above all, be honest to yourself.

“Failing at a business does not mean you have failed as a farmer but failing your stock does.”

The affected farmer should have reached out to Federated Farmers for support, Ms Milne said.

“You will find we all want to help so no one needs to be an island.

“I also need to make it clear that there is no way anyone can condone the maltreatment of livestock. Aside from an obvious and significant destruction of commercial value, it is ethically unacceptable.”

News Link:- http://beforeitsnews.com/mass-animal-death/2012/09/240-starving-cows-killed-on-farm-new-zealand-2430310.html

 

Convictions soar in animal cruelty cases

Comments Off

ANIMAL protection authorities are striking back hard at the worst abusers with a four-fold rise in prosecutions in five years.

But the RSPCA is facing a new challenge in the increasing abandonment of animals, which it says is partly caused by rising financial pressures on households.

Figures released to The Advertiser by the RSPCA show there were 2200 public reports of ill-treatment of animals in the last financial year.

Of those, 69 alleged offenders were prosecuted and all but two cases resulted in convictions.

This is a big jump on the 17 prosecutions recorded in 2007-08.

Despite the court successes, the number of animals suffering abuse remains staggeringly high.

Animal protection authorities are striking back with a rise in convictions for abuse and cruelty.

Among the thousands of cases reported last financial year are allegations a 30kg german shepherd was kept locked in a galah cage measuring 70cm by 70cm by 90cm. Inspectors are also investigating decapitation of a lamb and the deaths of two six-week-old labrador-cross puppies in a sealed garbage bag.

RSPCA chief inspector Simon Richards said the “significant increase” in prosecutions was a result of changes to the Animal Welfare Act in 2008. Under the new Act, fines and prison terms were doubled to a maximum four-year jail term or a $50,000 fine, which encouraged the public to come forward. ” I have yet to see anyone jailed for 4 years, & have seen many cases worthy of a 4 year jail sentence. Perhaps the Judges should see the abuse first hand, that might jee them up to actually prosecute & jail people!”

Our penalties are among the highest in the country (and) our prosecution rate is higher than any other state,” Mr Richards said.

“The tougher penalties indicate the public opinion on animal cruelty and how abhorrent it is, and have increased people’s awareness.”

Although investigative techniques had “vastly improved” in recent years, thanks to forensic science, the RSPCA prosecutes just 3 per cent of reported cases.

“A prosecution is not a win for the RSPCA – we’re about prevention,” Mr Richards said. “A small proportion of  our cruelty reports result in prosecution and, obviously, there’s an enormous number that don’t – we resolve those issues through education (of alleged offenders). Prosecution is for the worst of the worst … “

University of SA psychology lecturer Dr Alan Campbell said cruelty could be motivated by revenge or a misplaced sense of “fun”.

“Animals are easy targets … for a period of time they can get off on the killing and when that happens, consequences just go out the window,” he said. “For others, it’s to demonstrate violence (or) the power one has over a family. Killing a family pet demonstrates that (a person) can kill a family.”

Neglect cases, he said, were often borne out of ignorance. “One can’t blame ignorance as an excuse not to feed animals, ignorance means ‘Oh, I didn’t know it needed food to survive’ !! Please…even small kids know animals need food…anyone can see a skinny animal & know that it needs food or it will die. That’s not ignorance, that’s just sheer laziness! Or a case of  ‘you wanted it so you feed it’ …& of course they don’t, so the poor thing dies, then they all blame each other!”

“The majority just can’t be bloody bothered to feed their animals, especially if it means them having to leave their cozy house & go out back to feed a dog, or to a barn or field to feed horses or cattle…most of the time it’s simply because they just can’t be arsed! “

“There may be an understanding that animals can fend for themselves,” he said.

“They believe you should be able to leave them in paddocks to eat grass, or dogs and cats in a pen and chuck some food in there.” “So are we to assume these owners don’t look at the animals, that they are blind, they can’t see that their horses or dogs are skin & bone? Of course they can…but these are the animals who are not pets as such, they are just garden ornaments or their to protect property. Therefore not to be loved or attended to, these owners,  just throw the odd bit of food & nothing else!

News Link:-http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/convictions-soar-in-animal-cruelty-cases/story-e6frea6u-1226419473898

House bill criminalizes unlawful killing of animals

Comments Off

CRUELTY, maltreatment and the killing of animals may soon be declared a criminal act under a proposed law filed at the House of Representatives.

Guimaras Representative JC Rahman Nava authored House Bill 6049, which seeks to amend Republic Act 8585 or the Animal Welfare Act by creating an Animal Welfare Division and Animal Welfare Advisory Committee under the Bureau of Animal Industry of the Department of Agriculture (DA).

Have something to report? Tell us in text, photos or videos.

“The Animal Welfare enforcement officers shall have the full authority to seize and rescue illegally traded and maltreated animals and to arrest violators of this Act subject to existing laws, rules and regulations on arrest and detention,” he said.

Under the bill, it shall be unlawful to torture an animal, to neglect to provide adequate care, maltreat an animal or subject it to fights not authorized by law, kill an animal or procure them to be killed or use them in research or experiments not authorized by law.

Violators face six months to six years imprisonment or a fine of not less than P5,000 but not more than P50,000.

They shall likewise be prohibited from owning or possessing any animal after serving his or her penalty. If found to own and possess any animal, an additional penalty of six months imprisonment and P100,000 fine shall be imposed.

Nava said the bill prohibits the killing of animals except those suited for human consumption like cattle, pigs, goats, sheep, poultry, rabbits, carabaos, horses, deer and crocodiles.

However, the lawmaker said killing of animals may be allowed only if it is done as part of religious rituals, tribal or ethnic custom of indigenous communities; if the animal is inflicted of incurable communicable disease or if it is necessary to put an end to the misery suffered by the animal

News Link:-http://www.sunstar.com.ph/manila/local-news/2012/06/28/house-bill-criminalizes-unlawful-killing-animals-229207

Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,375 other followers

%d bloggers like this: