Tag Archives: New Mexico

Judge Dismissed Cruelty Charges Against Charles River Laboratories

Posted on by
Reply

In March, a New Mexico judge dismissed three misdemeanor animal cruelty charges against employees of Charles River Laboratories.

The charges stemmed from the 2002 deaths of two chimpanzees and the near death of a third chimpanzee at a Charles River Laboratories primate facility in Alamogordo , New Mexico.

In all three cases, veterinarians looked after the animals and then left the facility, instructing security guards to monitor the animals\’ condition overnight. The security guards had no veterinary training.

The misdemeanor charges alleged that this constituted animal cruelty, but State District Judge Jerry Ritter ruled that since the deaths of the animals occurred in the practice of veterinary medicine, the animal cruelty statutes did not apply.

In Defense of Animals complained that this was a \”technicality\” although it seems exactly the sort of situation the veterinary medicine exemption was intended to avoid — clogging up the courts with claims of animal cruelty based on differing opinions about appropriate veterinary care procedures would be a serious misallocation of law enforcement resources.

IDA\’s Elliott Katz said in a press release,

We now know that for Charles River and the NIH, the \’practice of veterinary medicine\’ constitutes intentional and repeated abandonment of critically ill chimpanzees to once-per-hour observation by security guards.

Source:

New Mexico Judge Dismisses Animal Cruelty Charges Against NIH Chimp Lab Operator on Legal Technicality. Press Release, In Defense of Animals, March 30, 2005.

Animal Cruelty Charges Dropped. Rene Romo, Albuquerque Journal, March 29, 2005.

Cruelty charges dropped against Charles River Labs. Christopher Rowland, The Boston Globe, March 29, 2005.

Share

HSUS Wants Filmmakers to Boycott New Mexico

Posted on by
Reply

The Humane Society of the United States purchased a number of ads in the Sundance Film Festival Insider, the film festival\’s daily program, urging filmmakers to stop making movies in New Mexico until the state bans cockfighting.

The text of the ad warns filmmakers that, \”In New Mexico, \’Entertainment\’ Includes Watching Animals Fight to the Death.\”

Currently about four major films are scheduled for shooting in New Mexico, and Governor Bill Richardson called HSUS\’ tactic immature, according to the Associated Press.

Source:

NM cockfighting ban debate sparks boycott ads in Utah, citations in Idaho. Associated Press, January 25, 2005.

The HSUS Appeals to Filmmakers at Sundance for Support on N.M. Cockfighting Ban. Press Release, Humane Society of the United States, January 20, 2005.

Share

Uncooperative Weather Keeps Wolves Killed in Alaska to 51

Posted on by
Reply

A combination of weather factors limited the number of wolves killed as part of Alaska\’s aerial control program this winter. As of January 9, only 51 wolves had been killing according to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.

During last year\’s aerial wolf hunt, hunters in Alaska killed 144 wolves.

Bruce Bartely, information officer for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game told the Fairbanks Daily News Miner,

It\’s probably down from what we\’d like to see but given the circumstances it\’s probably the best we could hope for.

The state plans to mail out additional permits at the end of January for pilots and hunters in an effort to reduce by about 500 the number of wolves in five regions.

Source:

Aerial hunters foiled in pursuit of wolves. Tim Mowry, Fairbanks Daily Miner, January 8, 2005.

Share

PETA, HSUS to Focus on Cockfighting Bans in Lousiana, New Mexico

Posted on by
Reply

With the recent Supreme Court decision that ended two years of efforts to overturn Oklahoma\’s cock-fighting ban, and the defeat of a pro-cockfighting politician in Louisiana, the Humane Society of the United States and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals look to focus on enacting bans in Louisiana and New Mexico, the last two states in the United States where cockfighting is allowed.

PETA is focusing on New Mexico. In a press conference with Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez and actress Rue McClanahan, PETA\’s Dan Mathews said,

Yes. Absolutely. We are targeting New Mexico.

Over the past few years, New Mexico has become a hot spot for filming Hollywood productios and Mathews hopes to convince producers to avoid the state until a ban on cockfighying is passed.

Cockfighting is already banned in 13 of New Mexico\’s 33 counties, and in 29 of its cities, including Albuquerque. A proposed ban on cockfighting passed New Mexico\’s state house earlier this year, but couldn\’t get out of committee in the state Senate.

PETA wants the state to take up a cockfighting ban during its 60-day session that begins in Jaunuary. According to the Albuqurque Journal, a poll it took thsi summer found that two-thirds of registered voters supported a ban on cockfighting.

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, however, remains non-committal on a ban, with his spokesman telling the Albuquerque Journal,

Cockfighting is already banned in the majority of counties and municipalities. The governor is willing to discuss and consider any legislative measure after a full and thorough debate on all sides.

Meanwhile, HSUS is looking to push a ban in Louisiana, where its political action committee spent $250,000 in advertising against a pro-cockfighting candidate for U.S. Senate. HSUS\’s Wayne Pacelle was quoted in The Guardian (UK) as saying,

We intend to eradicate this cruel, barbaric practice. My advice to anyone moving to Louisiana thinking it\’s a cockfighting refuge is not to unpack their bags — it\’s going to be a very short stay.

Sources:

PETA targets NM film industry over cockfighting. Dennis Domrzalski, New Mexico Business Weekly, November 15, 2004.

Cockfight ban gets TV star\’s support. Kate Nash, Albuquerque Journal, November 16, 2004.

Final battle to rid the US of \’barbaric\’ cockfighting. Richard Luscombe, The Observor, November 21, 2004.

Share

Charles River Laboratories Faces Animal Cruelty Charges

Posted on by
Reply

In September a district attorney in New Mexico charged Charles River Laboratories and two of its employees with misdemeanor animal cruelty in the case of three non-human primates which the complaint charges did not receive adequate care at a facility the company managed.

In 2001 Charles River was awarded a 10 year, $42 million contract from the National Institutes of Health to manage the troubled Alamogordo Primate Facility which had previously been managed by the now defunct Coulston Foundation. The Coulston Foundation had turned over ownership of 288 primates at the facility to the NIH as part of settlement with the U.S. Department of Agriculture stemming from violations of the Animal Welfare Act. NIH then contracted with Charles River to manage the facility.

The criminal complaint filed against Charles River alleges that through negligence the company provided inadequate care to two chimpanzees which resulted in their death, and that it provided inadequate care to a third chimpanzee which survived despite a serious injury.

According to the complaint, on Sept. 16, 2002, Charles River employees failed to provide adequate veterinary care to a chimpanzee which had suffered an injury, instead leaving the animal to be monitored by security guards overnight. The animal died as a result of the injury.

Similarly, the complaint alleges that around Dec. 30, 2002, Charles River employees failed to provide adequate veterinary care to a chimpanzee who failed to wake up from anesthesia. Employees allegedly directed security guards to monitor the animal overnight. The chimpanzee died.

Finally, the complaint alleges that around June 26, 2003, Charles River employees again failed to provide adequate veterinary care to an injured chimpanzee, and instead directed security guards to monitor the animal overnight. The animal eventually recovered.

The complaint also notes that three chimpanzees were accidentally electrocuted earlier this year when repairs caused their cage to come in contact with a high voltage electrical circuit.

Charles River denied the charges, saying that in the instance involving alleged neglect, that \”veterinarians provided the immediate and appropriate medical attention necessary to the animals, all of whom had underlying health issues because of the diseases to which they had been exposed.\”

The criminal complaint names the company itself, as well as its CEO James Foster and the chief veterinarian at the Alamogordo Primate Facility, Dr. Rick Lee.

Conviction on each count of misdemeanor animal cruelty would carry a maximum penalty of up to 364 days in jail and a fine of $1,000.

Sources:

Las Cruces Chimp Lab Facing 3 Cruelty Charges. Rene Romo, Albuquerque Journal, September 8, 2004.

Complaint alleges animal cruelty at federal facility. Christopher Rowland, Boston Globe, September 10, 2004.

Share

Albuquerque Public Schools Criticizes PCRM Lunch Survey

Posted on by
Reply

After a Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine survey criticized the nutritional value of lunches served at Albuquerque Public Schools, a nutrition coordinator for the school system says she never would have cooperated with the survey if she had realized that PCRM was an animal rights group.

Stephanie Fila, nutrition coordinator for APS, told the Albuquerque Tribune that she didn\’t realize PCRM was an animal rights group advocating a vegan diet when she responded to their survey. According to Fila, the APS lunches meet all USDA requirements and added that,

Real physicians would not recommend a vegan diet for growing children.

Jeanne Stuart McVey, while acknowledging that Physicians Committee for Responsible MEdicine actually has very few physician members, defended the nutrition survey saying,

We are advocates. But we really look at the science. We promote healthy diets, and there are so many studies showing that meat is just not the healthiest thing.

McVey also tried to distance PCRM from People for the Ethical Treatment, claiming that PCRM no longer receives funding from PETA,

. . . in the past, PETA might have supported one of our animal-testing programs, but we do not get funding from them now.

Of course McVey forgets to mention The Foundation to Support Animal Protection which appears to have been set up specifically to allow PETA to fund PCRM while hiding the relationship between the two groups.

Source:

APS: Lunch study unfair. Frank Zoretich, Albuquerque Tribune, September 4, 2004.

Share

New Mexico Senate Unanimously Passes Ban on Type of Animal Euthanasia

Posted on by
Reply

In February the New Mexico state Senate unanimously approved a bill that would ban the use of intracardiac injection euthanasia in that state. Intracardiac injection kills an animal by injecting barbiturate directly into the heart of the animal.

Sen. Richard Romero, who introduce the bill, said that he sponsored the ban become too often the procedure misses the heart leaving the animals to suffer. Romero told The Albuquerque Tribune,

We need to put a halt to this inhumane practice in our state\’s animal shelters right away. This amounts to tormenting and torturing an animal when it\’s done without anesthesia or sedation.

The ban will only apply to animal control facilities and animal shelters. The procedure will remain legal in livestock and veterinary facilities.

The full text of the bill can be read here.

Sources:

Senate OKs bill to prohibit type of animal euthanasia. Associated Press, February 11, 2004.

. Albuquerque Tribune (New Mexico), February 12, 2004.

Share

New Mexico SB 51 – Animal Euthanasia

Posted on by
Reply

SENATE BILL 51

46th legislature – STATE OF NEW MEXICO – second session, 2004

INTRODUCED BY

Richard M. Romero

 

 

 

 

 

AN ACT

RELATING TO CRIMES; PROHIBITING INTRACARDIAC ADMINISTRATION OF
EUTHANASIA ON A CONSCIOUS ANIMAL.

 

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO:

     Section 1. A new section of Chapter 30, Article 18 NMSA
1978 is enacted to read:

     \”[NEW MATERIAL] INTRACARDIAC INJECTION PROHIBITED ON
CONSCIOUS ANIMAL.–

          A. It is unlawful for an employee or agent of an
animal control service or facility, animal shelter or humane
society to use intracardiac injection to administer euthanasia
on a conscious animal if the animal could first be rendered
unconscious in a humane manner.

          B. A person who violates the provisions of
Subsection A of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and
shall be sentenced in accordance with the provisions of Section
31-19-1 NMSA 1978.\”

- 2 -

Share