[glencorgi]

During all this time, there was an
ongoing criminal investigation, so no
information was, or could be, given out
to the public or to the news
media. In many animal confiscation
cases, the criminal charges against
the animal owner are dropped as soon as
the confiscating party is granted
permanent possession of the animals.
This is a pressure tactic and a
ploy used by the prosecution to keep the
truth and any evidence from
being obtained by the animal owner or by
the media while the confiscating
party pursues their confiscation case.
This case followed that modus
operandi. In this case, the breeder won
her birds back in court, and
all criminal charges have now been
dropped against the breeder and her
friend. In this case the owner of the
birds fought back, and won her
birds back, against seemingly
overwhelming odds that she would not be
able to successfully fight the powerful
and arrogant SPCA.
The hearings spanned three months and
were grueling. The first court
hearing was attended by approximately 20
aviculturists. It was very
obvious to all the aviculturists and
professional breeders in the
courtroom that the SPCA personnel and
lawyers knew virtually nothing
about birds, or breeding birds, or their
anatomy or diseases, or their
proper maintenance. The entire SPCA team
(including the sheriff’s
officer who first arrived on the scene,
all of the testifying SPCA
personnel, their testifying
veterinarians, and their attorneys) were in
way over their heads. Some of the
testimony presented by SPCA
witnesses
regarding the care the SPCA was giving
to the birds made it clear that
the SPCA did not know how to care for
any bird, much less care for a
flock of breeding birds. They used
bleach in their cleaning solution to
clean the birds’ area, resulting in
damage to the birds’ respiratory
systems. They fed the birds incorrectly,
resulting in some of the birds
developing diarrhea. They incorrectly
assumed that vials of polyoma
vaccine found at the breeders home were
medications for diseased birds,
and they demonstrated that they knew
virtually nothing about bird
diseases or treatment for bird diseases.
The vet for the SPCA was a dog
and cat vet with an interest in birds,
but she is at least ten years
behind the times in the evolution
regarding avian medicine and care.
As the prosecution continued to put on
their case they were oblivious to
the fact that most of their witnesses’
statements were idiotic and that
their evidence simply served to
demonstrate their ignorance about birds
and bird care. It became clear that the
SPCA was accustomed to winning
animal confiscation cases based on
unfounded allegations and with hardly
any effort.
We were not intimidated. Of course, we
realized that this biased,
unbalanced, and inaccurate information
that was being presented to the
judge by those who knew practically
nothing about birds was all the judge
was hearing, and we realized that if we
expected to prevail we needed an
expert who knew about birds to testify -
otherwise the case was going to
be a “slam dunk” for the prosecution. We
needed an avian specialist.
Jan and I called veterinarians all over
the state. Other members were
working with their vets trying to get
them on board. We were told that
no vets could afford the time off from
their practices to testify on the
breeder’s behalf. Many told us to walk
away and let them have the birds
- we were told “you can’t win against
the SPCA”. The cost of defense
was going into the thousands of dollars
for this breeder, and all for a
bunch of cockatiels, even though they
were being bred for show and
careful genetic blood lines. The cost
was way over what the birds were
worth. This breeder could not afford to
bring in an avian vet, that’s
all there was to it.
Despite all the nay-sayers, and all the
cautions that we could never win
against the SPCA, we were not willing to
abandon the breeder or our
cause. Individual members of the Florida
Federation of Aviculture
started donating money for a vet. Two
bird clubs in Florida, the
Imperial Bird Club, and the Jacksonville
Bird Club both donated $500.00
each for vet costs. To them I am
eternally grateful. Some clubs and
organizations refused to get involved,
for fear of the SPCA or some other
organization making them targets for
harassment. This is another fear
we breeders are now faced with. If we
help, will we suffer too?
Many aviculturists attended all four
hearings. Dr. Margaret Wissman, a
board certified avian veterinarian,
agreed to be a witness for the
defendant and testified at the last
hearing. It is my belief that her
testimony made it clear to the judge
that the allegations which the SPCA
had made about disease and perceived
cruelty and neglect were not a
truthful picture of the situation - Dr.
Wissman made it clear to the
judge that the breeder was not cruel or
abusive or neglectful - and that
her testimony is what turned the case in
the breeder’s favor. It took
the judge almost two weeks to reach a
decision. The petition from the
SPCA was denied in its entirety - the
SPCA lost on every count. The
judge ordered the SPCA to return all of
the birds and other animals to
their owner.
Existing law in Florida can be, and is,
used to harm breeders and animal
owners. We have a statute in Florida
that gives any law enforcement
officer the right to call any recognized
agency (such as the SPCA, animal
control, Humane Society, and even some
rescues) to immediately
confiscate
animals, without a warrant and without a
hearing, if they in their
opinion, feel there is any animal
neglect or cruelty. They do not have
to call FWC, the only organization that
has training in exotic animals
here in Florida. This law creates a very
serious situation for all of
us - a situation that gives us all
something new to fear. All of us
who own birds and other animals now have
to recognize that “public
perception” may be the standard used to
judge us when allegations of
animal abuse and neglect are made
against us by law enforcement or
“animal welfare” personnel. “Public
perception” may or may not be
accurate or truthful, but it will be
used by law enforcement and “animal
welfare” personnel to make judgments in
an area in which they have no
training or expertise. “Public
perception”, when it is not based on
fact, can wreak havoc on any enterprise,
especially in the area of
breeding birds.
We also must remember that most of the
“animal welfare” organizations
that claim to have the best interest of
the animals first and foremost,
are against breeding animals of any
kind. Many of them support the
philosophy of “animal rights”, which
contends that animals are not ours
to use. They especially do not believe
in breeding animals to be sold
as pets. Many of them do not believe
that we have the right to own or
use animals of any kind for food, for
fiber, for research, for
entertainment, or as pets. Those same
organizations, who have been
given the power under existing law to
allege animal abuse by their
owners, and who have been given the
power to confiscate animals from
their owners without a warrant and
without a hearing, are fundamentally
and philosophically biased against
breeders. Existing law allows these
organizations to be our accusers, our
judges, and our executioners, and
they revel in that power - they are the
poster children for the saying
“Power Corrupts - And Absolute Power
Corrupts Absolutely”. They have
an
absolute conflict of interest when it
comes to any case involving
breeders, and they should not be allowed
to participate in any
confiscation cases - yet the law allows
them to freely operate and freely
confiscate despite this clear conflict
of interest. Of course these
organizations will confiscate, at the
mere hint of a dirty water bowl or
recently spilled food. Many of these
people see problems where none
exist, or knowingly create them - as was
done in this case. The
sheriff’s officer ordered the barking
dogs (who had been found loose in
the yard) to be tied up next to a dirty
water bowl, then had photographs
taken of the situation as “evidence” of
their “abuse” by their owner.
So now, not only are we afraid to leave
our birds at night, we cannot
leave during the day either. In the
event my dog would escape the yard
and caused a car accident, a sheriff
would come out to my property and
up
to my door. As he walked along the
pathway, he may see a bowl full of
water (changed an hour ago) just full of
mushy pellets, and smelling
like, well you all know what it smells
like. He may see a bird in a
small cage that is being medicated, or
under veterinary care. What
would his perception be, and would he
call the SPCA or humane society,
or
even a rescue organization? When I would
arrive back home from
shopping
for veggies and other good bird food,
would my birds all be there, or
would they have been taken to some
secret place where I could not see,
or
find out about them?
Thank you AFA for Fred Smith. Thank you
FFAI for your work in this
and
thank you, Imperial Bird Club and
Jacksonville Bird club, for your
monetary support in this effort. Thank
you Dr. Wissman for your support
of aviculture. We could not have done it
without you.
Many people behind the scenes worked
tirelessly on this case, and studied
the FWC regulations as well as county
and state statutes. I am very
grateful to all that pitched in and did
work and made donations in the
name of aviculture. Many people from out
of state gave their support
and donations as well, and I thank all
of you too.
After this experience, and seeing the
support of the avicultural
community, I know that yes, it is all
worth it.