The Sick Mentality of Country Music Singer Troy Gentry: Buy a Captive Bear, Pretend it’s in the Wild, then Shoot it in the Lungs with a Bow and Arrow

Pretend it’s in the Wild and Shoot it in the Lungs with a Bow and Arrow and Film the Act

This goes beyond anything I’ve seen lately.

What Troy Gentry does to this tame bear is beyond cruel. This video is disturbing and shows just how cruel Troy Gentry of the country music duo Montgomery Gentry is. You won’t believe it when you see the tame bear come over to them and then Troy shoots him in the side. The bear is in shock and attempts to walk away. He then begins to breathe heavily as blood fills in his lungs. You can hear it and it’s disturbing. Troy laughs and has no sympathy for this timid and tame bear as he suffers in death.

It’s pretty clear this bear suffered not only in life, but horribly in its last minutes on Earth.

I always hate to bring up this stuff, but it’s the unfortunate truth of this life that the cruelty of some people knows no bounds.

Thanks to SHARK - Showing Animals Respect and Kindness – which obtained the video from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act. Had they not done this, this horrid event would have gone unnoticed by the public.

Yes, the title is right. He bought a bear, forced it into unnatural captivity (which is torture in itself), then, perhaps to make himself look tough, staged the killing incident for film. Luckily, the only thing that came from this is that he was (somewhat) punished. Yes, it wasn’t to the level of felonies (probably because he’s famous in country music) but at least it wasn’t let go.

Here is a description of the event from another site at http://www.tinygreenbubble.com/eco/environmental/item/1005-country-singer-kills-captive-bear It’s pretty clear this bear suffered not only in lift, but horribly in its last minutes on Earth.

“Enter Troy Gentry, who after buying the bear, the staged a hunt (in a fenced in area), pretended he was in the wild, and then proceed to film his tough-guy self shooting the bear in the lungs with a bow and arrow.

How does a bear die from being shot in the lungs? Like anyone shot in the lungs, death comes by drowning in one's own blood. In fact, in the video as smiling, triumphant Gentry is holding the dead bear, Cubby's mouth is filled with blood.”

Article:

http://www.komonews.com/news/entertainment/105820988.html

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - An animal rights group has posted a video of country music star Troy Gentry killing a captive, tame black bear in Minnesota.

The group SHARK - Showing Animals Respect and Kindness - obtained the video from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act, and posted it on YouTube on Monday.

Steve Hindi, president of the Geneva, Ill.-based group, said SHARK wanted to make the video public because it thought Gentry got off too lightly.

Gentry, half of the duo Montgomery Gentry, pleaded guilty in 2006 to falsely registering the bear as shot in the wild. He was fined $15,000 and put on probation for three months. He also forfeited the stuffed bear and the bow he used.

Montgomery Gentry's management company did not immediately respond to messages.

Election 2010: Excellent Article Lays Out the Animal-Related Initiatives (Potential Laws) on the Ballots in the Upcoming Election: Any in Your State??

I won’t say much here other than visit this posting at http://hcb.typepad.com/hounded_cowed_badgered/2010/10/on-the-ballot-on-tuesday.html to see if any initiatives are on the ballot in your state. You'll also see that the author tells you how to vote. I’ve posted the text of the article in below as well for quicker reading, but make sure you visit the posting as well.

You’ll also notice that the blog “Animals & Politics” at http://hslf.typepad.com/political_animal/ is listed below. Please also visit this site for more on animal rights-related legislative initiatives.

Article:

Animal law on the ballot

http://hcb.typepad.com/hounded_cowed_badgered/2010/10/on-the-ballot-on-tuesday.html

Animal-related initiatives are on the ballots in several states in this upcoming election. All but one involve hunting and fishing; one concerns the breeding of dogs. Unfortunately, no initiative this year addresses the most commonly abused animals in the U.S., farm animals.

Voters in four states will be asked to vote on a constitutional right to hunt. It's difficult to know what motivates these efforts, except the need for pro-gun groups to energize their hunter members. The NRA says the amendments are needed to head off attempts to limit hunting and fishing by "well-funded anti-hunting activists." This is not a serious statement, given that gun groups have exponentially more power and resources than those few animal rights groups that target hunting.

When these initiatives do pass, as others have, it's not doomsday for hunting opponents. The provisions typically recognize the state's power to regulate---they cover the right to hunt or fish "lawfully" or say these activities are subject to regulation. Courts have treated similar provisions in other states as basically inspirational. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, for instance, has held an amendment establishing the right to hunt "does not affect our analysis of the DNR's authority."

The reasons for animal rights advocates to oppose a constitutional right to hunt are fairly miminal, though they outweigh the nonexistent benefit to animals. If any of these initiatives were voted down, it would mean that pro-hunting groups had wasted their time and money (though who knows, maybe a successful "NO" campaign would make proponents feel ever more paranoid about the alleged threat of animal rights groups). And, if there ever was an attempt to ban hunting---maybe around 2060?---these initiatives would be an impediment. On these symbolic initiatives, a symbolic NO is the way to go.

I've listed each of the ballot items below, with a recommended vote. For more election coverage, check out Animals & Politics, where Michael Markarian has been doing an excellent job, especially on the Arizona and Missouri ballot items.

Arkansas. Issue 1, if passed, would recognize a constitutional right to hunt, fish, and "harvest wildlife." It would also set these activities as the preferred method of wildlife control. The language would benefit from a comma, as a hasty reader might be shocked that "[p]ublic hunting, fishing, and trapping shall be a preferred means of managing and controlling nonthreatened species and citizens...." (The rest of the sentence makes clear humans are not in fact in danger.)

Arizona. Prop 109 would also enshrine a constitutional right to hunt and fish, and make hunting and fishing the preferred method of wildlife population control. In addition, the measure would shift the power to regulate those activities to the legislature, which may in turn, delegate it back to a commission, which presumably would keep doing what its doing. Feeling dizzy? This move contrasts with Arkansas's Issue 1, which expressly retains power for its game and fish commission, which is itself constitutionally based (see amend. 35). In a fine analysis, Kristin Borns and CJ Eisenbarth Hager point out potential problems with some vague language in the measure. Vote NO.

Missouri. Prop B sets regulations for large-scale "puppy mills," including giving dogs space to move around and to exercise. In contrast to the position of some in the debate over Prop 2 in California, it seems unlikely that the proposed regulations could increase the number of animals bred. Rather, it would reduce the scale of breeding operations and (if enforced) improve the conditions of animals being bred. Vote YES.

North Dakota. The North Dakota Constitution already has two provisions recognizing the value of hunting. Measure 2 would criminalize canned hunts of big game and "exotic animals." The measure's proponents claim it reflects "Fair Chase" principles. For folks opposed to factory farming, some of their ideas might be appealing: no breeding programs, no feeders, no government culls. People opposed to animal exploitation for food and recreation, however supposedly benign, could be less easily persuaded. For me, the question is whether fewer animals will be killed or wounded.

Supporters claim canned hunting makes all hunting look bad. Would a NO vote then reduce hunting? I doubt it. This is rare case where criminalizing an act might actually stop abuse. The proprietors of canned hunting ranches are businesspeople and, if there is enforcement, would be forced to shut down. If less canned hunting meant less hunting, I'd say to vote YES. But this is the sort of dispute, between different types of hunters, that I find difficult to find a good ethical position on.

South Carolina. Amendment 1 would recognize a right "to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife traditionally pursued." The invocation of tradition could be a loophole: it would be hard to argue hunting "traditionally" occurred with high-powered scopes, or fishing with sonar and GPS (not that any law coming down the pike would ban these tools). Vote NO.

Tennessee. An amendment to the constitution would create a "personal right to hunt and fish." Vote NO.

Quick Action: Urge Congress to Pass The Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act: Prohibit the Transport of America's Horses Across State Lines for Slaughter

Yep, this issue is still very much active. Horrible, as most do not realize that “More than 100,000 horses are slaughtered every year overseas for horsemeat in Europe and Asia.”

Here is a link to a page that will provide more detail about this important issue and allow you to act:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/779/152/853/?z00m=19897002

Don’t be a slacker! Get on it!!

“A Stevens-proof ban on crush videos?” A Deeper Look at the Bills Being Drafted to Counteract the Supreme Court Legalizing Animal Crush Videos

Insightful Article Asks: “A Stevens-proof ban on crush videos?” A Deeper Look at the Bills Being Drafted to Counteract the Decision by the Supreme Court to Make Animal Crush Videos Legal

We wrote last week on the issue of the likelihood of the US Senate drafting a new law to counteract the Supreme Court decision to allow animal crush videos - http://geari.blogspot.com/2010/09/us-senator-states-that-re-banning.html

Yes, for those who didn’t see it, the US Supreme Court decided to make sick animal crush videos legal.

This article again addresses this issue, but provides great insight as to the nature of both versions of the bill coming from the separate chambers of the US legislative branch.

Titled, “A Stevens-proof ban on crush videos?” I suggest that all interested in this issue read this article.

I posted in the text below for quick reading, but, please view the original at http://hcb.typepad.com/hounded_cowed_badgered/2010/10/a-stevens-proof-ban-on-crush-videos.html as the author provides MANY hyperlinks to outside resources.

Article:

OCTOBER 11, 2010

A Stevens-proof ban on crush videos?

http://hcb.typepad.com/hounded_cowed_badgered/2010/10/a-stevens-proof-ban-on-crush-videos.html

In April, the Supreme Court decided United States v. Stevens, its biggest animal law case since the Lukumi decision in 1993. The case involved a First Amendment challenge to a federal law designed to stop crush videos, pornography showing small animals being crushed to death. The government in Stevens ran with the statute and prosecuted a seller of dog fighting videos. The Supreme Court, on an 8-1 vote, held the statute was constitutionally overbroad.

The majority opinion faulted the law for reaching animal-related acts that are not defined as "cruel." The law, as written, required use of a depiction of "animal cruelty," but defined cruelty to include any wounding or killing of an animal that violated federal or state law. The court imagined various scenarios where a depiction of a purportedly uncruel act (e.g., hunting without a license) would nonetheless violate the law. It found particularly troubling that a person could be convicted of possessing a video showing violence against an animal that was not in fact illegal in the possessor's state.

The Stevens court held out the possibility that a more targeted law--one "limited to crush videos or other depictions of extreme animal cruelty"--could pass constitutional muster. Now comes news that the House and Senate have passed bills aimed at crush videos that ... actually target crush videos.

I've put together a table comparing the language in the statue now, in the Senate bill, and in the House bill. The full texts of both versions are at Govtrack.us. Both bills do a better job of defining the depictions being banned, though the Senate does a better job still by not requiring the depicted abuse to also be a state or federal crime. Both contain findings that draw parallels to caselaw on obscenity and child pornography. Both in fact require the depiction to be obscene; given the descriptions in the case, I'd hope all crush videos would qualify.

I personally find it difficult to get excited about these bills. They target a tiny segment of the pornography market and a miniscule portion of the animal abuse in this country. How little Congress cares about animals is evident in one change between the House and the Senate bills. The House bill recognizes a compelling interest in "preventing animal cruelty," a good policy goal, if one rarely acted on. The Senate bill, however, finds a compelling interest only in "intentional acts of extreme animal cruelty." What of "mere" animal cruelty? Well, some arguably cruel practices are expressly excluded from the statute's reach by an exception for depictions (even obscene ones!) involving hunting, fishing, and agriculture.

The one bright spot I see in the legislation is in the Senate's definition of the offense. It criminalizes the sale, distribution, etc., of depictions of animals being abused in several specific ways (e.g., drowning, suffocation), but also includes a catchall for depictions of severe bodily injury against animals. Severe bodily injury is defines not once but twice in reference to existing laws against humans. The law incorporates the definition in 18 U.S.C. § 1365(h)(3), which contemplates the injury of "another person" and "any individual." Most strikingly, the Senate bill defines severe bodily injury to include "conduct that, if committed against a person and in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, would violate section 2241 or 2242." As the links show, these statutes define the federal crimes of aggravated and simple sexual abuse. The Senate bill thus implicitly recognizes that harm to nonhumans is of a similar kind as harm to humans.

The Senate bill is also notable for its definition of the animal being depicted. While the current law and the House bill cover "living animals," the Senate covers "non-human mammals, birds, reptiles, or amphibians." On the one hand, this definition excludes insects and fish; on the other, it acknowledges frankly that humans are animals of a sort. This language parallels some state definitions of "animal" which expressly exclude human beings. See this Maine statute.

Famous Artist Banksy Storyboards and Directs the Opening to "The Simpsons": Don’t Miss the Animal Rights / Cruel China Message

I’m always on the lookout for new ways to creatively express the concerns we address on this blog.

All I can say is please watch to the end as the message is quite clear as to the cruel Chinese way of life in relation to all of life. Sad, but true. Amazing that this was even allowed to be shown considering the message. I guess the overlords didn’t get it!

For more information on just how cruel China is, also see our article “Crash Course in the Unbelievable Cruelty Behind the Eating of Cats and Dogs in Korea and China: Sick Countries Beyond Ethically Challenged” at http://geari.blogspot.com/2006/03/crash-course-in-unbelievable-cruelty.htm

Photos from Nikon's “Small World Photomicrography Contest” Speak to the Unity of Life, Regardless of Species

This is one incredible project. So why am I posting on it? Seeing photos like this speaks to the unity of life, regardless of species. As you’ll see, this contest “…capture[s] some of the first moments inside the eggs of animals including starfish and butterflies.”

When you see photos like this, you cannot deny the commonality. For example, you’ll see the photo showing the bones of the feet of a developing frog. Just as with a developing human, you’ll see 5 fingers and very similar bones.

The question that immediately came to mind for me was why are certain species literally born to be tortured or live very cruel lives and then die? When developing, they are innocent and that innocence is beautiful. But, then it’s broken as they live out their lives. This to me was a sad realization of the beauty and ugliness of life. Of course, also the reality that this is all human-defined as it’s humans that cause such a lack of empathy to other species – speciesism.

The link to the actual project is http://www.nikonsmallworld.com/vote From here you can actually vote for your favorite.

Wired also did a very good summary of the project at http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/09/gallery-microphoto-embryos/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+wired/index+(Wired:+Index+3+(Top+Stories+2))&pid=128

Animal Testing Company - Professional Laboratory and Research Services - in Corapeake, North Carolina Shut Down After Video of Cruelty Released

One win in a huge battle.

Of course, this is only one lab in a huge network that carries out the exact same cruelty day to day. It’s horrible to imagine just how many dogs, etc. are tortured daily and no one bears witness.

Article:

Lab shuts down after animal rights video released - September 16, 2010

http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2010/09/animal_testing_lab_shuts_down.html

A private laboratory involved in animal testing has halted research and will hand over its animals, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced yesterday (AP).

The shutdown comes after the animal rights organization, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), released an undercover video showing how animals were treated at Professional Laboratory and Research Services, based in Corapeake, North Carolina. According to PETA, the company had contracts from several major pharmaceutical companies to test products on animals.

The video shows laboratory employees discussing the use of sedatives that expired in 2007. “Maybe that’s why it doesn’t work,” says a voice on the video, shortly before the scene cuts to a dog twitching as its teeth are pulled with a pair of pliers. In another clip, one employee counsels another not to bother reporting a dog’s sores to the veterinarian. “If you have ten dogs that have the same problem, it’s not a problem,” she says. “It’s a living condition here.”

The USDA reportedly inspected the lab last week, and has launched a formal investigation. Officials are now trying to find new homes for about 200 animals.

U.S. Senator States that Re-Banning Animal Crush Videos 'A Virtual Certainty' After Horrible Supreme Court Decision Made them Legal

Thank whatever you want – god or not – but this is a huge development. It’s heartening to see that the Senate still has some decency as a key member used the terminology 'A Virtual Certainty' when saying that a bill to ban sick animal crush videos will survive.

Unbelievably, this is due to the fact that “On April 20, the Supreme Court in an 8-1 decision overturned a 1999 federal law that banned the creation of such videos...” I could go on and on as to the sick ramifications of this horrible decision, but you get the point.

As stated below, “Crush videos visually depict the abuse and killing of animals, many showing "a scantily clad, high-heeled woman stomping, squishing" and otherwise torturing animals such as puppies and kittens to feed a sexually deviant audience…”

We can only hope this happens and we’ll keep you informed.

Article:

Senator Says Re-banning Animal Crush Videos 'A Virtual Certainty'

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2010/09/senator-says-re-banning-animal-crush-videos-a-virtual-certainty-.html

A speedy Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this morning paid notice to animal rights groups that hope to flatten a resurgence of "animal crush" videos, an industry they say has regained ground after the United States v. Stevens decision reversed a previous ban on their creation and distribution.

Crush videos visually depict the abuse and killing of animals, many showing "a scantily clad, high-heeled woman stomping, squishing" and otherwise torturing animals such as puppies and kittens to feed a sexually deviant audience, said Nancy Perry, vice president for government affairs for The Humane Society, during testimony.

On April 20, the Supreme Court in an 8-1 decision overturned a 1999 federal law that banned the creation of such videos, reversing a criminal conviction of Robert Stevens, who was sentenced to three years of jail time for making videos of dog fights. The Court said the law was too broad and could include productions relating to hunting and fishing.

Ever since, Congress and animal rights organizations have been working on legislation that would put a federal ban back in place. Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) presided over the hearing and said it was his hope, after testimony and questioning, to help draft a Senate version of the July 21 House bill that would "narrowly tailor" the issue. The more specific the bill, the better chances it has of standing should it ever face scrutiny again, he explained.

Kevin Volkan of the California State University psychology program testified that crush video fans suffer from paraphilias, or sexual disorders similar to fetishes. There's no question what purpose the videos serve, he said.

"They are clearly sexual in nature," Volkan said. He also said his research shows that viewers typically will not acknowledge or treat their behavior unless they've been arrested and forced into treatment by the court.

ACLU lobbyist Michael Macleod-Ball said Volkan's testimony also contributed to the obscenity argument, a rule of measure that excludes speech referring to explicit sexual acts from First Amendment rights. Animal cruelty is illegal but banning the depiction of such acts inherently violates free speech, he said.

Congress could be trying to expand the definition of obscenity, which they cannot and should not do, he said.

An audience of roughly 50 listened as Perry described a video in which a puppy's mouth and legs were tied shut while someone stomped a stiletto heel through its eye socket. Further, a Humane Society investigation has found that new videos are being custom produced — a viewer may place an order specifically requesting the type of animal and torture — and receive it within 48 hours, she said.

A federal ban would help limit the crush video industry, which almost disappeared after the 1999 law, she said.

Kyl said the likelihood of the new bill being signed into law before the end of this session is "a virtual certainty." Both he and Macleod-Ball said the challenge would be that the law is written narrowly enough to survive judicial scrutiny.

"If they don't get it right, it's just going to go back up and down again," Macleod-Ball said, referring to the possibility that someone could challenge a new ban and bring it to the Supreme Court once more.

Video Acts as Undeniable Proof: Baby Elephants Tied Up and Electro-Shocked by Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus Trainers

In my research today for another posting I came across this video of absolute unspeakable cruelty toward BABY Elephants. This truly shows the truth of how circuses like Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus MAKE elephants do unnatural tricks - they torture them. If you don't believe me then look at the video.

To see this unbelievable cruelty which shows via video Baby Elephants Tied Up and Electro-Shocked by Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus Trainers visit: http://www.ringlingbeatsanimals.com/bound-babies.asp

European Union Bans Animal Testing Using Great Apes: Also Puts Restrictions on Using Other Primates and Requires Non-Animal Methods When Possible

The title says it all. Wow. As stated below, “The new legislation also places significant restrictions on testing on other primates and requires that non-animal methods be used whenever possible.”

Any change, be it small or large can lead to more. Celebrate this one and use it to cause more change to occur.

However, the fight is not over. As also stated in the article below, an important question is asked about the fate of chimpanzees in a New Mexico torture facility: “This is an exciting development—but it also raises a question: In light of this humane advance, how can the U.S. government justify its plans to transfer more than 200 “retired” chimpanzees from a facility in New Mexico to a research laboratory in Texas, where they’ll probably be forced to endure cruel experiments?”

Article:

VICTORY: EU BANS TESTING ON GREAT APES!

http://animalrightscollective.wordpress.com/2010/09/09/victory-eu-bans-testing-on-great-apes/

September 9, 2010, 11:23 pm

Filed under: AR News, News, Video | Tags: primate testing, great apes, EU bans great ape testing

From The PETA Files:

There’s great news from across the Atlantic, where the European Union has voted to ban the use of great apes in experiments. The new legislation also places significant restrictions on testing on other primates and requires that non-animal methods be used whenever possible.

This is an exciting development—but it also raises a question: In light of this humane advance, how can the U.S. government justify its plans to transfer more than 200 “retired” chimpanzees from a facility in New Mexico to a research laboratory in Texas, where they’ll probably be forced to endure cruel experiments?

There is no excuse for it, of course, so please help us persuade officials to permanently retire the chimpanzees to a sanctuary.

Posted by Jeff Mackey

New EU Rules on Animal Testing Ban Use of Apes

from AFP

STRASBOURG — Europe banned the use of great apes in animal testing Wednesday as part of drastically tightened rules to scale back the number of animals used in scientific research.

After two years of heated debate on how to protect animal welfare without scuppering scientific research, the new limits, updating regulations from 1986, were adopted by the European Parliament despite objections from Green MEPs.

Under the new legislations, experiments on great apes such as chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans are to be banned and “strict” restrictions set on the use of primates in general.

Members of the 27-nation bloc, who are given two years to comply with the rules, also need “to ensure that whenever an alternative method is available, this is used instead of animal testing.”

And they must work at “reducing levels of pain inflicted on animals.”

Proponents of the abolition of animal testing objected that the new rules failed to go far enough.

“Animals will still be used as guinea pigs,” said the Greens in a statement. “They will still suffer pain.”

“It is possible to reduce the number of animals used for science without hindering research,” added Belgian Green Isballe Durant.

But Health and Consumer Policy Commissioner John Dalli dubbed it “a good compromise on a difficult topic.”

“Today we have the chance to bring the EU to the forefront by caring for animals and protecting science,” he said.

Other MEPs said the demands of scientific research came over and above animal welfare.

“An animal’s an animal and a human being’s a human being,” said Italian conservative Herbert Dorfmann.

“Medical progress is crucial to humanity and unfortunately, to achieve this progress there must be animal testing.”

The legislation notably allows the use of primates in testing illnesses such as Alzheimer’s, cancer or Parkinson’s disease if there is scientific evidence that the research cannot be achieved without using these species.

To avoid repeated suffering by an animal, it lists different categories of pain that may be inflicted during a test (non-recovery, mild, moderate or severe) and proposes that the same animals be reused only if the pain is classed as “moderate,” and provided a vet is consulted.

At the moment some 12 million animals are used each year in scientific experiments in the EU.

The legislation calls for government inspections on a third of national laboratories that use animals, some of which must be unannounced.

Last year the European Union banned the testing of animals for developing cosmetics, except for long-running toxicology tests which will be banned altogether in 2013.

Two National Groups Challenge the EPA in their Proposal to Carry Out Unnecessary Animal Testing on 29 Chemicals

It seems like this comes up every few years. We can only hope that the existing data located can be used to prevent the EPA from believing that they need to carry out these unnecessary tests

Article:

Animal rights group challenges EPA chemical test proposals

http://chemicalwatch.com/4906

09-Sep-2010

NGO People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) was due to give evidence today at a public meeting organised by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to discuss a proposal to require further test data for 29 high production volume substances for which the agency says it has "preliminarily determined that there are insufficient data and experience to reasonably determine or predict the effects of the manufacture, processing, or use of these chemical substances, or of any combination of such activities, on human health or the environment".

PETA and the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine today argued that some of the tests proposed for 15 of the chemicals are unnecessary as the data sought can be found elsewhere. PETA accuses the EPA of failing to apply its own animal welfare guidelines to the testing proposals.

PETA located existing data for seven of the chemicals or groups of chemicals included in the proposed test rule. These include two chemicals, 1-tetracosanol (CAS No. 506-51-4) and 1-hexacosanol (CAS No. 506-52-5) the aluminum salts of which have already been addressed in the HPV program, and a third, 1-Decene, sulfurized (CAS No. 72162-15-3), that has already been included as part of a chemical category. PETA also suggested analogous chemicals for which data exist for three additional chemicals. Chemical manufacturers and importers made in-house toxicity and exposure data available for five additional chemicals.

Artist Amy Grace Draws Attention to the Cruelty of Circuses and of Course of the "Cruelest Show on Earth" Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus

I am a firm believer in using graphics to show the reality of the issues we discuss. Photos and videos go a long way toward changing hearts and minds, as it’s hard to forget images.

I’ve pasted in one of Amy’s graphic art pieces below titles “Elephants Never Forget” which I believe delivers a strong visual message about the hell and cruelty animals in circuses endure, especially elephants.

You can view the photo directly at her site at http://amygrace.com/blog/2010/08/elephants-never-forget/

To see unbelievable cruelty which shows via video Baby Elephants Tied Up and Electro-Shocked by Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus Trainers visit http://www.ringlingbeatsanimals.com/bound-babies.asp

For more on the cruelty of circuses, including videos showing the reality of the abuse animals endure in them, visit http://www.circuses.com/ringling.asp

To see more of the work of Amy Grace, visit her site at http://amygrace.com/blog/

Here is what she writes directly under the graphic athttp://amygrace.com/blog/2010/08/elephants-never-forget/

Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus and other circuses beat and whip elephants to force them to perform silly tricks. Far away from the big-top spotlight, the cries of these isolated and scared animals go unheard.

Many may or may not know that I am a big advocate for animal rights. It really breaks my heart to pieces to see any animal suffer, and there’s a lot of abuse that goes on today…most of which people probably aren’t even aware of. I do what I can to help bring awareness to these issues…so when PETA recently sent out notices about these poor circus elephants, I was immediately inspired to do my own photo piece that would help to bring notice to the issue. I truly feel for these poor animals. I will never support the abuse of animals for the entertainment of people by taking my child to the circus. I hope that others can say the same.

Chains are for swings, not elephants.

Boycott ringling.

www.ringlingbeatsanimals.com

Yes, People Hunt Alligators: Animal Rights Foundation of Florida (ARFF) Plans to Protest

I posted this because I want to make sure people are aware that there is alligator hunting. No surprise, unfortunately, but sometimes we forget that no species is safe.

Article:

Gator-hunt protest

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/features_lifestyle_animal/2010/09/gator-hunt-protest.html/comment-page-1

alligators — posted by mary anna gentleman on September, 9 2010 4:10 PM

A notice from the Animal Rights Foundation of Florida (ARFF):

Activists with ARFF plans to call attention to alligator hunting by hanging a large banner reading “Gator Hunting = Heartless Killing” at the Interstate 4 overpass at Conroy Road at 5:30 p.m. Thursday, Sept. 9.

Lake Jesup, Lake Harney and Lake Monroe are among the Orlando-area destinations for alligator hunters. Florida’s 2010 alligator hunt began on Aug. 15 and continues until Nov. 1.

AARF objects to the way in which alligators are snared by hunters.

According to ARFF coordinator Bryan Wilson, “Death is rarely quick, and alligators may be left to suffer long after being pulled from the water.”

Annual Cruel Dolphin Slaughter Begins in Taiji, Japan: The Documentary “The Cove” Has Attempted to Expose this Unspeakable Horror

I usually don’t make such a statement as really, almost all of the issues I cover are of extreme cruelty. But, this practice really pushes me to state it as one of the cruelest. This is literally a dolphin slaughter of extreme cruelty and proportion.

I’m hoping that in my life time this will end. One group has attempted to expose this practice.

Perhaps you’ve heard of the documentary “The Cove” that has attempted to expose this unspeakable horror. They literally had to go undercover to get the footage necessary to show the world just how horrible the Taiji dolphin slaughter is.

Here is the trailer for the movie:

The website for the movie is at http://www.thecovemovie.com/ and also lets you know what you can do to end this practice - http://www.takepart.com/thecove .

Japan, with its illegal continuation of whaling is still one of the world’s cruelest countries. It cares nothing for life. We can only hope that one day they wake up and end their love of death and cruelty.

Article:

Dolphin hunt kicks off in Japan 'Cove' town

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hiTLwbby8nMONbMgY-

L91WPmDWFA

(AFP) – 7 hours ago

TOKYO — Fishermen from the Japanese town depicted in Oscar-winning eco-documentary "The Cove" kicked off their annual dolphin hunting season Wednesday, undeterred by international criticism.

A flotilla of boats went to sea in the morning but failed to catch any of the sea mammals on the first day, said a local government official from Taiji in southwestern Wakayama prefecture, who asked not to be named.

Every year, fishermen in Taiji herd about 2,000 dolphins into a secluded bay, select several dozen for sale to aquariums and marine parks and harpoon the rest for meat, a practice long deplored by animal rights activists.

The Taiji official said several foreigners with cameras were seen walking around town, but that there had been no protests and no confrontations between animal rights activists and pro-dolphin-hunting nationalist groups.

"I have no idea what the foreigners' intentions are, but there is nothing unusual going on in the town. Our stance remains the same. The town will continue hunting dolphins no matter what they say," said the official.

"The Cove", directed by Louie Psihoyos, won the Academy Award for best documentary this year, and has been followed up by a series that has started screening on cable channel Animal Planet called "Blood Dolphins".

The team that shot "The Cove" over several years often worked clandestinely and at night to elude local authorities and angry fishermen, setting up disguised cameras underwater and in forested hills around the rocky cove.

Individual fishermen in Taiji routinely decline to speak to foreign media, but they have the support of many local people in the town of 3,700 who defend hunting dolphins, porpoises and small whales as a centuries-old tradition.

Right-wing nationalist groups in Japan -- known for their ear-splitting street demonstrations using megaphones -- have attacked "The Cove" as anti-Japanese and tried to stop its screenings by harassing movie theatres.

Such harassment forced the film's distributor to scrap screenings in June, but it managed the first commercial showing at a police-guarded Tokyo theatre in July, despite a brief skirmish between right-wingers and supporters.

The official said Taiji had expected protesters against the dolphin hunts to flock to the town Wednesday but he told AFP: "I see no impact from the movie. The town's stance to continue dolphin hunting will not change either."

Activist Ric O?Barry, a central character in "The Cove", wrote in his blog that his campaign, Save Japan Dolphins, had called off a visit to Taiji after receiving news that "extreme nationalist groups are set to confront us".

Instead, he said he and other volunteers would on Thursday visit the US embassy in Tokyo "to symbolically present 1.7 million signatures from 151 countries" in a campaign to end the annual dolphin hunts.

Dog Fighting Kingpin David Tant Up for Parole Sept 8th: Easy Way for You to Comment To Prevent Tant from Being Released

You can see just how sick David Tant is by viewing the photos at the Facebook page set up for this at http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=491739&id=503460435&fbid=10150249984935436

This is very easy to do. In fact, the first link below takes you right to a window to fill out a comment, and the second link below provides an easy petition to sign.

Please keep reading. I was sent this by another group:

LETTERS ARE MOST IMPORTANT! PLEASE SEND REGULAR MAIL AS WELL! ***EVERYONE CLICK THIS LINK TO PROVIDE THE LETTER TO OPPOSE DAVID TANT'S PAROLE. THEY MAKE IT VERY EASY TO DO. MAKE SURE YOU PUT IN DAVID'S # 306170***

http://www.dppps.sc.gov/oppose_parole.html (for those having an issue when they click on this link, I did too. You need to copy the URL address and paste in new window. For some reason the site is slow).

*WE NEED LETTERS SENT AND PLEASE SHARE!* KINGPIN DOG FIGHTING BREEDER SET FOR PAROLE SEPT 8TH!!

**AND SIGN PETITION HERE**

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/convicted-dog-fighter-david-tant-seeks-parole/

"Tant was notorious as a long-time, high-profile breeder and fighter of pit bulls, and his demise delivered a startling blow to the underground dogfighting industry in the entire country."

David Tant of Charleston County, South Carolina was reportedly considered by the underground dogfighting community to be one of the top breeders of fighting pit bulls in the country. In April 2004, authorities seized 47 pit bulls from Tant's property, many with injuries consistent with dogfighting.

They found dogfighting

equipment: caged treadmills, a "rape box" (designed to restrain female dogs so that they can be forcibly bred), cattle prods, harnesses, a bear trap, homemade gun silencers, dogfighting magazines and remnants of a dogfighting ring.

In November 2004, after two days of a jury trial, the defendant pleaded guilty to four counts of animal fighting and one count of assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison for animal fighting, 10 years in prison for creating a booby trap, and restitution of about $150,000.

On July 21, 2010, six years into his 30 year sentence, Tant was granted his first parole hearing in front of three members of the seven-member parole board. He was not required to go in front of the full parole board because,shockingly, his is considered a non-violent offense. The vote was split 2-1 in favor of parole. Because the partial board did not reach a unanimous decision, Tant will go in front of the full board on September 8.

Write a polite letter to the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services to oppose parole for this dogfighter, who is responsible for the suffering of many innocent animals in this violent bloodsport. Use SC PPP's online comment form to oppose parole for

DavidTant, SC Department of Corrections inmate # 306170.

SUBJECT: NO PAROLE FOR David Tant # 306170

Inmate # 306170

South Carolina Department of

Probation, Parole and Pardon Services

2221 Devine Street, Suite 600

P.O. Box 50666

Columbia, SC 29250

MORE INFO ON CASE: http://www.pet-abuse.com/cases/2187/SC/US/

FOR INFO CALL: For Public Information people can call 803-734-9267 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 803-734-9267 end_of_the_skype_highlighting

Parole/Pardon Information

1-803-734-9200

***EVERYONE CLICK THIS LINK TO PROVIDE THE LETTER TO OPPOSE DAVID TANT'S PAROLE. THEY MAKE IT VERY EASY TO DO. MAKE SURE YOU PUT IN DAVID'S # 306170***

http://www.dppps.sc.gov/oppose_parole.html (for those having an issue when they click on this link, I did too. You need to copy the URL address and paste in new window. For some reason the site is slow).

VISIT PREMADE LETTER TO SEND (please edit so all aren't the same! The parole board will NOT take this seriously if everyone send same letter!):

VISIT FOR A PREMADE LETTER: http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=491739&id=503460435&saved#!/notes/stacy-paige/justice-through-action-dog-fighting-kingpin-up-for-parole/422916648095

Even After OSHA Cites SeaWorld $75,000 Death, they Refuse to Admit Just How Unnatural and Dangerous it is to Keep Wild Animals Such as Killer Whales

I think this quote says it all in regard to how unnatural it is to keep wild animals such as Killer Whales / Orcas:

“SeaWorld recognized the inherent risk of allowing trainers to interact with potentially dangerous animals,” said Cindy Coe, OSHA’s regional administrator in Atlanta, Ga. “Nonetheless, it required its employees to work within the pool walls, on ledges and on shelves where they were subject to dangerous behavior by the animals.”

In addition, look at this quote which again ponts to just how unnatural and dangerous this practice is:

"In addition to the history with this whale, the OSHA investigation revealed that SeaWorld trainers had an extensive history of unexpected and potentially dangerous incidents involving killer whales at its various facilities, including its location in Orlando. Despite this record, management failed to make meaningful changes to improve the safety of the work environment for its employees."

Article:

OSHA Cites SeaWorld $75,000 Following Animal Trainer’s Death

http://ehstoday.com/safety/news/osha-cites-seaworld-animal-trainer-death-2372/

Aug 24, 2010 2:58 PM, By Laura Walter

OSHA has cited SeaWorld of Florida LLC a total of $75,000 for three safety violations following the Feb. 24 death of an animal trainer. SeaWorld, however, argued that OSHA’s allegations are unfounded and intends to contest the citations.

On Feb. 24, a 6-ton killer whale grabbed a trainer and pulled her under the water as park guests watched. Video footage shows the killer whale repeatedly striking and thrashing the trainer and pulling her under water even as she attempted to escape. The autopsy report describes the cause of death as drowning and traumatic injuries.

“SeaWorld recognized the inherent risk of allowing trainers to interact with potentially dangerous animals,” said Cindy Coe, OSHA’s regional administrator in Atlanta, Ga. “Nonetheless, it required its employees to work within the pool walls, on ledges and on shelves where they were subject to dangerous behavior by the animals.”

OSHA’s investigation revealed that this animal was one of three killer whales involved in the death of an animal trainer in 1991 at Sea Land of the Pacific in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. SeaWorld had forbidden trainers from swimming with this whale because of his dangerous past behavior, but allowed trainers to interact with the whale, including touching him, while lying on the pool edge in shallow water.

In addition to the history with this whale, the OSHA investigation revealed that SeaWorld trainers had an extensive history of unexpected and potentially dangerous incidents involving killer whales at its various facilities, including its location in Orlando. Despite this record, management failed to make meaningful changes to improve the safety of the work environment for its employees.

“All employers are obligated to assess potential risks to the safety and health of their employees and take actions to mitigate those risks,” said Les Grove, OSHA’s area director in Tampa, Fla. “In facilities that house wild animals, employers need to assess the animals under their care and to minimize human-animal interaction if there is no safe way to reliably predict animal behavior under all conditions.”

OSHA has issued one willful citation to SeaWorld for exposing its employees to struck-by and drowning hazards when interacting with killer whales; a serious citation for exposing employees to a fall hazard by failing to install a stairway railing system by a Shamu Stadium stage; and one other-than-serious violation for failing to equip outdoor electrical receptacles in Shamu Stadium with weatherproof enclosures.

SeaWorld to Contest Violations

SeaWorld called OSHA’s allegations “unfounded” and intends to contest the citation.

“The safety of our guests and employees and the welfare of our animals are core values for SeaWorld and areas in which we do not compromise,” the company said in an Aug. 23 statement sent to EHS Today.

According to SeaWorld, the Feb. 24 death of a trainer “inspired an internal review of our whale program that has been unprecedented in scope. The findings of that review have been presented to an independent committee made up of some of the world’s most respected marine mammal experts. Their conclusions, drawn from decades of experience caring for marine mammals, are in stark contrast to OSHA’s. The safety of SeaWorld’s killer whale program was already a model for marine zoological facilities around the world and the changes we are now undertaking in personal safety, facility design and communication will make the display of killer whales at SeaWorld parks safer still.”

The company went on to state the OSHA’s allegations are unsupported by evidence and exhibit a lack of understanding of marine animal safety requirements. SeaWorld operates under permits to exhibit killer whales; is overseen by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the U.S. Department of Commerce National Marine Fisheries Service; and is a member of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums and the Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums, which address employee safety in their accreditation processes.

“It also is important to note that while maintaining a safe environment for our trainers, the demands of humane care require our zoological team to work in close physical proximity to these animals. Our trainers are among the most skilled, trained and committed zoological professionals in the world today. The fact that there have been so few incidents over more than 2 million separate interactions with killer whales is evidence not just of SeaWorld’s commitment to safety, but to the success of that training and the skill and professionalism of our staff,” the company stated.

Government Wants to Kill Wolves Again: What You Can Do to Speak Out Against

By the way, just because I post from other groups doesn’t always mean I’m a full supporter of that group. I’m just passing on the horrible news.

Seems the government wants to kill Wolves again. They seem to love doing this.

Please visit this link to see what you can do to speak out against: http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/campaign.faces?siteId=3&campaign=WolfKilling&origin=ARS_FACE_FAN_ADGROUP_TAKEACTION_WOLFID

Help Stop the Federal Wolf Killing Plan

http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/campaign.faces?siteId=3&campaign=WolfKilling&origin=ARS_FACE_FAN_ADGROUP_TAKEACTION_WOLFID

Speak out against a federal plan to use aerial gunning and poisonous gas to kill entire wolf packs in Idaho.

Goal: 30,000 • Progress: 502

Sponsored by: Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund

The federal Wildlife Services agency (a branch of the U.S. Department of Agriculture) is the primary wolf-killer in the United States— and now wants to expand their wolf-killing operations. They plan to work with Idaho officials to eliminate up to 80 percent of the wolves in north-central Idaho by land and from the air.

Their plan also includes killing entire packs— including gassing helpless wolf pups in their dens— and surgically sterilizing alpha wolf pairs.

Pregnant Pit Bull Doused with Gasoline and Burned to Death While Giving Birth to Her Puppies: What You Can Do to Bring Prosecution

Need I say more? Received this via email.

Please visit this link to act: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/228/justice-for-mimi-pregnant---doused-with-gasoline/

JUSTICE FOR MIMI ... PREGNANT - DOUSED WITH GASOLINE

Target: Animal Control, Memphis TN, the Governor of TN, ASPCA overseeing TN

Sponsored by: Ingi's Quest 2 save the abused

POOR LITTLE MIMI ... JUST 2 YEARS OLD ... EVEN IN DOG YEARS THAT'S JUST 14 :( BARELY A TEENAGER!!!

She was a gorgeous Pit Bull and pregnant, January 2008 - she was doused with gasoline and burned to death WHILE GIVING BIRTH TO HER PUPPIES!!!!

This outrageous, cruel, evil behaviour must end, and must end NOW!!! We can no longer sit back and pretend this abuse does not exist. It DOES exist, and it is extremely wide spread across this nation. Will you continue to pretend it doesn't???

UPDATE AUGUST 4th, 2010

I HAVE RECEIVED THIS INFORMATION FROM THE CREATOR OF THE FACEBOOK PAGE "JUSTICE FOR MIMI"

Justice For MiMi - Prosecute Her Killer!

Targets: Memphis Police Department - Larry A. Godwin, Director; City of Memphis - A C Wharton, Jr., Mayor; Memphis City Council - Bill Morrison, William C. Boyd, Harold B. Collins, Wanda Halbert, Jim Strickland, Edmund Ford, Jr., Barbara Swearengen Ware, Joe Brown, Janis Fullilove, Myron Lowery, Kemp Conrad, Shea Flinn, Reid

Ohio Veal Calf Farm Exposed in New Video: Shows Calves Covered in Feces and Chained by their Necks in Narrow Stalls

Note: this post went live yesterday, but I found out today that Costco is actually a big customer of this group. As a consumer, you should know this.

I have embedded the actual video shown in the article below. Again, you can’t argue against video. Anyone still not aware of the hell and suffering baby veal calves endure just isn’t paying attention.

Article:

Activists Say State Board Not Doing Enough To Protect Animals

http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2010/aug/31/3/mercy_for_animals_accuses_veal_farm-ar-216504/

By Marshall McPeek & Donna Willis

Published: August 31, 2010

Updated: August 31, 2010 - 12:07 PM

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Animal-rights activists lash out at the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board Tuesday morning, saying the board is dragging its feet and not doing enough to protect animals.

Mercy For Animals released a new, undercover video Tuesday morning, hosted by TV star Bob Barker, that shows the conditions and treatment of calves at an Ohio veal farm.

According to a statement from the animal-rights group Mercy For Animals, the video shows calves covered in feces and chained by their necks in narrow stalls, where they are unable to turn around or walk.

WARNING: Video May Be Disturbing To Some Viewers.

The group said the footage shows the calves in 2-feet-wide wooden veal crates, which restrict the animals from lying down comfortably, breathing fresh air, seeing sunlight, cleaning themselves or bonding with their mothers.

The activists said the video is an example of standard veal-production practices and they call on the OLCSB to immediately ban those practices.

The group said the video was recorded covertly April 19, 2010, during a walking tour of a Northwest Ohio veal farm.

NBC 4 attempted to contact the farm in question and has left messages.

NBC 4 has not received a response from the farm and will release the farm's name when a statement is obtained.

Mercy for Animals said it sent a letter to the OLCSB Monday, Aug. 30, to demand action.

It has not yet received a response.

Mercy For Animals is the same group that released video from a dairy farm in Union County, showing workers beating cows with crowbars, stabbing them with pitchforks and punching them in their heads.

Will Ohio Change their Ridiculous and Lax Laws About Keeping Exotic Pets after Bear Killing?

My answer, probably and sadly no, but maybe the death will make some think.

Article:

Bear attack highlights lax Ohio exotic pet laws

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iNrDb5ra1GovER_itgzgfh9ORb3QD9HUALAG0

By JULIE CARR SMYTH (AP) – 11 hours ago

COLUMBUS, Ohio — The bear that recently killed a caretaker in a Cleveland suburb was the latest example of animal violence in a state that has some of the nation's weakest restrictions on exotic pets and among the highest number of injuries and deaths caused by them.

After a standoff between the Humane Society and agriculture interests, state officials are crafting restrictions on the ownership of dangerous wild pets. But the killer beast and others owned by former bear-wrestling entrepreneur Sam Mazzola, who was on probation at the time of the attack for illegally selling and transporting exotic animals, would have been grandfathered out of them.

"It's just a free-for-all in Ohio, and Sam Mazzola is just an example of that," said Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States. "Tigers, wolves, bears in a suburban Lorain County community: It is a disaster waiting to happen."

The death in Ohio and attacks elsewhere — including the maiming of a Connecticut woman by her friend's pet chimpanzee and a 2-year-old Florida girl squeezed to death by her family's python — highlight that the patchwork of federal, state and local laws on keeping dangerous wild animals at home has holes.

Mazzola had the proper state permit to keep the black bear, a species native to Ohio, on his property. He also kept wolves, tigers and a lion, saomething he was free to do because Ohio and at least four other states — Alabama, Idaho, Missouri and Montana — impose few or no restrictions on the ownership of non-native animals kept solely as pets, according to a review of state regulations by The Associated Press.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture regulates animals exhibited to the public but not private ownership. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requires permits for native endangered and threatened species but doesn't track non-native, endangered species unless they cross state borders.

The Humane Society cut a deal this year with Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland and leading farm groups that traded pulling an animal cruelty measure off the November ballot for certain animal protections, including a ban on exotic pets. Farm groups opposed the ballot measure, which would have imposed treatment and caging requirements on livestock, as threatening to Ohio's $93 billion agricultural industry.

Existing non-native animals, like the ones Mazzola continues to keep, may be kept under Ohio's proposed regulations, but owners would not be able to breed them or replace them when they die.

The ban also would exempt animals in zoos, research centers and existing athletic mascot programs, Strickland spokeswoman Amanda Wurst said.

Many exotic pet owners in Ohio and elsewhere believe big animals — especially predators such as lions, tigers, bears and cougars — are no longer safe in the wild because of habitat loss, public fear and poaching. They view themselves as conservationists.

"Of the overall amount of people who actually have snakes as pets, who actually have chimpanzees as pets, these incidents are a very small percentage," said Cindy Huntsman, whose Stump Hill Farm near Massillon houses 250 wild animals.

According to a database of publicized exotic-pet escapes and attacks since 1990 kept by the animal rights group Born Free USA, Ohio ranks fifth in the number of episodes that hurt or killed a human — 14. The leader, Florida, has had 43, followed by Texas with 19, New York with 18 and California with 16. Alabama ties Ohio with 14.

The Ohio bear attack occurred Aug. 19 when caretaker Brent Kandra, 24, took the animal out of its cage for feeding at Mazzola's menagerie. Mazzola's federal license to exhibit the bear was revoked after animal rights activists complained about his practice of taking money to let people wrestle Ceasar, another bear he owned. But he was still free to keep the animals.

Most people who work regularly with exotic beasts know and accept the risks, Huntsman said, comparing it to being a farmer or working with killer whales at SeaWorld.

Mazzola reflected that attitude in comments to reporters the day after the fatal attack, showing off a facial scar he got from an encounter with a bear and saying he had a total of 2,000 stitches from his time working with animals.

"These are the things that happen when you deal and love these type of animals," he said.

Tom Burrington, 68, a retiree who lives two doors from Mazzola, recalled after the attack that one of the man's bears once rolled over a neighbor, who had to go to the hospital.

"It was a big joke," Burrington said. "They said the bear sat on a guy, but it was not funny to the safety forces. There wasn't anything funny about it."

A federal judge on Friday ordered mental health treatment for Mazzola as new terms of his probation sentence after pleading guilty in 2009 to transporting a bear to Toledo and selling a skunk without a license. Mazzola's attorney didn't return a message Monday seeking comment.

Animal rights groups have used attacks like the one that killed Kandra to push for tougher regulations elsewhere.

After a friend's 200-pound pet chimpanzee mauled and blinded a Connecticut woman in 2009, state lawmakers voted to ban ownership of large primates and other potentially dangerous animals, such as bears, leopards and wolves.

Since the Florida girl was suffocated by her family's Burmese python last year, it has become illegal for individuals there to own them and six other large, exotic reptile species.

Born Free USA considers it inhumane to keep large, wild animals in captivity even if they don't hurt anyone, Executive Vice President Adam Roberts said.

Exotic pet ownership also includes the risk of infectious disease, damage to the environment when pets are set free or escape, and a growing financial burden on animal rescue groups that run sanctuaries for animals that are abandoned, he said.

The Association of Zoos & Aquariums recommends against exotic pet ownership in part because of the lethal diseases wild animals can carry: distemper and rabies in carnivores; herpes in monkeys; and salmonella in reptiles. Vaccines used on domestic animals often don't work on their wild cousins, the group notes.

"People see wild animals and they see them as cute, as something they want to have, want to hold, want to covet," Roberts said. "Then they get bigger and more dangerous and the owner is in over their head."