Opinion: Demand changes to prevent future deaths of animals

How could any zoo place animals in covered cages inside a hot, unventilated Ryder furniture moving van and confine them there for two hours? And stop at a Dairy Queen instead of driving directly to the zoo while the animals scratched and bit at the inside of their cage in a struggle to stay alive? After neglecting to administer a sedative to prevent stress? My heart broke when I went to the zoo's Web site and saw the pictures they have posted of happy and healthy wallabies, especially if the zoo is the cause of this revolting and completely preventable tragedy. The wallabies that died were intended to be part of their new Wallaroo Station exhibit, which the zoo is using in an elaborate fundraising bash in August.

I urge everyone to help prevent future animal deaths by writing to our senators, the governor and the U.S. Department of Agriculture demanding a government investigation as to why Lowry Park Zoo routinely transports animals in unventilated furniture moving vans. E-mail, call or write Lowry Park Zoo and demand that they stop moving animals in the vans. Contact Ryder and demand that their company stops renting out furniture vans for use in zoo animal transportation.

The only way things will ever change is if enough people intervene and demand change now.
-- Brandy Love Reid, Safety Harbor

A miserable failure

Re: Wallabies die after trip in Ryder truck, July 2.

As a veterinary technician and a pet owner, I was saddened and outraged to learn of these animals' preventable deaths in the care of professionals. The wallabies' owner blames Lowry Park Zoo for the animals' deaths by improperly transporting them in the back of an unair-conditioned and unventilated Ryder truck for a two-hour trip from her Ocala farm to the zoo in Tampa.

But the animals' owner, Melinda Morgan, must accept responsibility also. Ms. Morgan questioned zoo veterinarian, David Murphy, about the use of the truck for transport, and although he assured her that this was a common method of transport for the zoo, it should be obvious to any animal caregiver that this was not safe considering the time and the temperature. She also asked about medicating the animals to calm them for "capture-related stress" which the veterinarian did not do.

The wallabies' owner and the zoo were responsible for the safety of these animals, and both failed miserably.
-- Carol Slauson, St. Petersburg

Activist's sentence is outrageous

Re: Noted animal activist sentenced for cruelty, June 29.

I have worked with Florida panthers for nearly 10 years and served as president of a non-profit group in Sarasota that brings panthers (and cougars) into classrooms, Boy Scout meetings, nature group gatherings, etc., all over Florida to discuss various problems facing panther recovery. As such, I have worked with Bert Wahl many, many times over the years. People always stop what they are doing to get a closer look at Bert's cat when he shows up, and we have their attention when we discuss issues like habitat loss, property rights and other issues we might not otherwise get them to think about.

Is Bert Wahl a saint? Nope. Did Bert coddle and gush and act silly over his cougar? Nope. Did Bert act as though his 175-pound cougar was a house cat? Nope. Did Bert teach thousands of children and adults in the Tampa Bay area more about panthers and how we can help them? You bet he did, and the judge's sentence depriving him of his freedom and ability to make a living or be with his family for nine months, and to come up with a $5,000 fine, is outrageous.

Maybe you rebuke his style, order him to change, even order him to stop keeping cougars if you have to. But put the man in jail for maybe -- maybe -- not being "nice" enough on one occasion to an animal he has loved and cared for for years and years? Outrageous.
-- William Samuels, former president, Florida PantherProject, Inc., Sarasota

Animal cruelty deserves harsh sentence

I'm sure I reflect the feelings of the majority of your readers who are appalled by the conduct of Bert Wahl and would like to urge all judges presiding over animal cruelty cases to impose the most severe sentences the laws allow in these cases. People who commit these atrocities are no more productive or forgiveable than pedophiles, rapists, murderers or thieves. They should have their rights and freedoms revoked just as those other criminals do, not to mention the added advantage of simply removing them from circulation in our environment where they are frequently repeat offenders.

The salt in the wound of this case is that the man convicted of this heinous crime acts under the guise of "wildlife activist." While researching this case, I came upon numerous articles in the St. Petersburg Times archives that covered this man's numerous previous animal cruelty offenses, dating back as far as 1993.

That poor cougar had cuts on his ear that needed stitches. Sounds to me like the previous authorities who were privy to this man's actions must have been missing part of their ears also, for what excuse can someone have for hearing these charges and turning a blind eye to these defenseless animals?
-- Daphne Fail, Palm Harbor

Redefining 'animal-rights activist'

Re: Wildlife activist guilty of cruelty, June 28.

The St. Petersburg Times byline that described Bert Wahl as an animal-rights activist was highly insulting to those of us who work for animal welfare.

And I can boldly speak for every international animal-rights group in stating that calling this man who had a state license to enslave animals for commercial profit an "activist" is like calling Osama bin Laden a "humanitarian."
-- Louise Kahle, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, St. Petersburg

'Times' policy needs addition

Your front-page headline of June 29, GOP fundraiser had lone tax exemption, is very misleading, unfair and certainly not worthy of being the top news item of the day -- unless you wanted to make a strong political statement against Republicans and their donors.

First, you used the word "had" instead of "has" because, as is later pointed out in the article, the GOP fundraiser, Dr. Zachariah P. Zachariah, does not have the "lone exemption" as of today.

Second, you later point out that in October 2000 a trial judge ruled that Dr. Zachariah has a legal tax exemption, although a Court of Appeals later reversed the decision. The matter is now being appealed to the Florida Supreme Court. Does this justify the top headline in your newspaper? You certainly imply that Dr. Zachariah, a Republican and a GOP fundraiser, did something wrong; yet the matter is still in legal limbo.

This is nothing but political bias on your part.

I suggest you add to your policy -- "The policy of our paper is very simple -- merely to tell the truth," -- the following: "and to be fair and honest."
-- M.A. Elliott, St. Petersburg

Clearing up the story

I would like to point out inaccuracies in the recent article, GOP fundraiser had lone tax exemption (June 29).

The article states, "until recently the GOP supporter was the only cardiologist who didn't pay into a fund to assist indigent patients." This is not true. There are many cardiologists in the state who have not paid into the indigent patient trust fund. However, the Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) has done nothing to pursue them. Dr. Zachariah is, to date, the only cardiologist in this state who has been granted in writing an exemption from AHCA from the tax. The physicians here at the Bay Area Heart Center are still awaiting official written confirmation of our exemption.

Additionally, there is a misstatement in the article that my cardiology group has written off 30 to 40 percent of our bills to indigent care. Last year we wrote off 12 percent of our accounts for patients who were indigent and could not pay. Hopefully, this will clarify some of the inaccuracies that were described in the article.
-- David M. Mokotoff, director, Bay Area Heart Center, St. Petersburg

Give us the important parts first

As a dedicated fan of your newspaper, I must admit to confusion after reading David Karp's Page 1 story concerning a possible Republican National Convention for Tampa Bay (GOP rally could cost taxpayers $10-million, June 26). Anyone reading only the front page would not understand the situation, I fear. (Sadly, most people don't read all the way to the end, as I did.)

The main headline and first paragraph told us that "taxpayers could wind up footing the bill for $10-million... " However, the secondary headline said quite the opposite -- that the convention could inject $500,000 into the Tampa Bay economy.

Which is it? A boondoggle for taxpayers of a big plus for us? Read on, I thought, and all will be revealed.

It wasn't -- not on Page 1. It wasn't until the 15th paragraph, way back on Page 9A, that readers learned more about the tantalizing second headline. (An academic study, based on the 2000 Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, estimated that we could raise $200-million to $500-million in additional spending. There were no further details, such as the multiplier effect, etc.)

If at all accurate, the additional spending and resulting tax benefits will easily offset the $10-million cost, right?

In future, I wish your writers and editors would go back to the old "pyramid rule," putting all the most important parts of the story in the first four or five paragraphs. Ask anyone at the Poynter Institute, and I'm sure they'll agree.
-- Bill Morrison, St. Petersburg

Remembering officer Marrero

It has been a year since we lost Lois Marrero, who was killed July 6, 2001, in the line of duty as a Tampa police officer. Lois was many things to many people. She was a brave career police officer, a daughter, a sister, a partner, aunt and a friend to many persons such as myself.

Lois had many "families." She gave these families her interest and time. Within the gay community, she worked for equal rights. Within her police family, she worked to increase respect and open doors for women police officers. Within her Hispanic family, she strived to represent with honor her Puerto Rican roots. She was very close to her birth family and had an especially close relationship with her niece, Natalia, whom she adored.

We can all learn from Lois Marrero's example. On the anniversary of her death, let us honor her spirit and her life by showing tolerance to our neighbors, to those who may differ from ourselves in lifestyle, gender, race, ethnicity or religious belief.
-- Aimee Trachtenberg, Dunedin

Share your opinions

Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They also can be sent by fax to 893-8675.

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.

For e-mail users: Letters can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com. E-mail messages must be text only and cannot include attachments. If you're using a word processing program to write the message, you must use its "Save as" function to save it as a text file, then import it into your e-mail program. Please include your return e-mail address, as well as your name, mailing address and phone number, in the text of the message.
--

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page