Animal Advocates Win Legal Battle with California Fish & Game

Animal Protection Institute
Monday, 15 April 2002

Late last year, the Animal Protection Institute (API) and the Fund for Animals sued the California Department of Fish and Game (CF&G) for its failure to enforce and comply with state laws governing captive wild animals. Only three months after the lawsuit was filed, API and the Fund for Animals entered into a settlement agreement, claiming victory for the captive wild animals in California.

BACKGROUND: The lawsuit stemmed from an API investigation into inconsistencies of CF&G regulations with existing statutes and actions.

California law requires that all facilities and persons possessing captive wild animals obtain a permit from CF&G. A permit is issued after the facility has been inspected by CF&G or an "eligible local entity" (a county, local animal control officer, local humane society, official, an education institution, or trained private individual) that enters into a "memorandum of understanding" (MOU), or official agreement, with CF&G. Once a permit is granted the facility must comply with humane care and treatment standards, minimum housing and caging, and transportation standards. To ensure compliance, CF&G or an eligible local entity may inspect a captive wild animal facility at any time.

CF&G changed its captive wild animal regulations, allowing veterinarians accredited by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to conduct inspections. State law allows an eligible local entity to conduct these inspections only if they have entered into a MOU with CF&G, conditions not met by USDA veterinarians.

Since the adoption of the law the CF&G had not entered into agreements with any eligible local entity or enforced the law. CF&G policy says captive wild animal permits will not be processed if the applicant is currently charged with or under investigation for a violation pertaining to the care and possession of prohibited animals, or for inhumane treatment of animals at the local, state, or federal level. API discovered that several permit holders were under investigation, charged and/or convicted for violations of the Animal Welfare Act while they were licensed by CF&G. These include Hawthorne Corporation, Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, Carson and Barnes Circus, and Sterling and Reid Circus.

API attempted to work with CF&G to resolve the clear violations of the law and the issues raised in API's investigation, but CF&G rejected continued efforts. There was no other recourse but to file a lawsuit, which has now been settled. API and the Fund for Animals have been rewarded with a settlement that basically satisfied all of the complaints.

"We're very happy with the outcome, which we see as a victory for all captive wild animals permanently housed in California and traveling through the state," says Virginia Handley, the Fund for Animals' California Coordinator.

As part of the settlement agreement, a required CF&G Animal Advisory Committee, which was disbanded in 1990, will be reestablished. Handley, an original committee member, and API General Counsel Nicole Paquette have both been appointed to serve on the reactivated committee.

"The existing California law is one of the best state laws in the country on this issue, and it's very important it be enforced," says Paquette. "Now with two voices on the committee, we're hopeful that Fish and Game will be doing its job ensuring the welfare of captive wild animals."

The Animal Protection Institute and the Fund for Animals are national animal advocacy non-profit organizations.

For more information, or to contact Animal Protection Institute, see their website at: www.api4animals.org