A Message Board, Guestbook, or Poll hosted for your website.
A community forum for the discussion of ethics and progressive ideas

New Posts
 
New York Bird Club > Forums > Animal Rights - Animal Welfare > Parrots in Peril - Factory Farming
 
 


Thread Tools Search This Thread 
Reply
 
Author Comment
 
luciedove
    12/18/05 at 08:46 PMReply with quote#1

Parrots in Peril

Roy breeding operation leaves birds in squalor, and despite complaints and investigations, Pierce County Council rejects change in ordinance.


At Martha Scudder’s Parrot Depot in Roy, hundreds of parrots, including many endangered species, have lived in cold, wet, filthy conditions for years, according to eyewitness accounts, experts, deposed testimony and scores of post-mortem reports.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

‘Factory Farming’ Approach Takes Toll

MIRA TWETI

For The News Tribune

When it comes to the money, breeding parrots is easy.

Macaws, African Greys and Umbrella cockatoos retail at PetSmart, for example, for $1,300 to $1,500. Rose-breasted cockatoos sell for as high as $2,500.

When it comes to the work, breeding parrots is hard.

Caring for large birds and hand-feeding their babies is a full-time job. Baby birds need to be delicately fed many times a day for months. Breeders say the time invested soon outweighs the profit margin.

To compensate, they often sell unweaned birds at half the retail price to stores, where it falls to untrained staff members to feed them.

“It’s never been about the birds,” says Carla Freed, a Kansas breeder and researcher. “It’s always been about the money.”

Learning the hard way

It’s a big business, though specifics are hard to come by because most breeding operations are backyard affairs with no regulation. That takes its toll on millions of exotic birds.

Few professional parrot breeders have formal education in avian science or animal husbandry. Most people start with a couple of pairs of birds and keep buying more, learning through trial and error.

“A lot of people start out as pet owners and see their pets go through a stage of reaching sexual maturity and being obviously unhappy,” said Benny Gallaway, president of the American Federation of Aviculture. “Looking out for that bird, they said, ‘Well, what you need is a mate.’

“And that leads to, ‘I’ll get another pet and pair them up so now Polly will be happy.’ And then Polly has babies, and it just grows and all of a sudden you don’t know how you got there, but all of a sudden you’ve got birds all around you.”

The business of parrot breeding underwent a major change in 1992, when Congress passed the Wild Bird Conservation Act. With the legislation, the United States effectively closed its doors to imports of birds caught in the wild. That fueled a boom in domestically bred parrots.

With U.S. breeders controlling the population, the birds available for sale were plentiful and the species varied. They also were less expensive to consumers.

In 1990, there were an estimated 14 million pet birds in the United States. By 1996, there were 40 million. Now, experts put the number at 50 million to 60 million pets with an estimated 2 million young parrots added each year.

Bare-bones conditions

For birds, their lives are bleak.

Never allowed to flock, fly or freely roam trees, many of the millions of parrots live as “captive breeders” for the large pet bird industry, says Richard Farinato, director of Captive Wildlife Production for the Humane Society of the United States.

These workhorses of the pet bird trade are the parents of the birds that end up in homes.

Across the country in an estimated 5,000 parrot farms, parrots are paired off in empty wire mesh cages with food and a perch or two.

Rarely are large breeder birds given appropriate care – such as baths, toys, space to fly, the ability to socialize in a common area and the chance to raise their young.

“They are not treated like pets – they are treated like production birds,” says Farinato. “They are kept in isolation, just to produce chicks.”

According to Farinato, that’s chiefly because of the cost and because many bird breeders believe the less birds have to distract them, the more time they will spend breeding.

“The bare-bones approach to production of parrots is essentially the same factory farming method used with laying hens, yet we are told by breeders that parrots sold as pets must have all the things their birds rarely receive,” he says.

This approach also keeps birds living in the dark for months or years.

“Taking sunlight away from birds is idiotic,” says avian veterinarian Tracy Bennett of Seattle. “Their whole breeding schedule is based on following the sun.”

And even if not intentionally deprived of sunlight, nearly all breed-ing parrots in northern climates are kept in enclosures during winter months.

The many months the birds are not breeding become a depressing and psychologically debilitating existence. Many birds grow aggressive from frustration, mutilating themselves or fighting with their mates.

Breeders also induce birds to overbreed, producing up to 10 times the number of eggs a year they would produce in the wild. This results in malnutrition, broken bones and worn-out reproductive organs in females.

“I’ve seen cockatoo hens bred almost to death,” Bennett said.

Bird breeders justify their methods saying they understand the needs and behaviors of their birds and should determine the best quality of care without outside interference.

Their ideas, though, often turn out to be wrong. For instance, some breeders complain they sometimes must wait years for a “proven pair” of birds to reproduce. Recent studies indicate the breeders’ outdated practices might be the reason.

When Cheryl Meehan, an avian behavior consultant in Seattle, was getting her doctorate at the University of California at Davis, she did several studies with flocking parrots. One looked at older birds that hadn’t bred over three or four cycles.

That changed when they were given baths, foraging enrichments, branches and the ability to fly and mingle with each other in a common space or retreat to their own cages, as well as, most important, choose their own mates.

In those conditions, she found, 75 percent of the birds laid eggs.

In most breeding facilities, even that good news can go bad.

Breeder birds are not allowed to raise their chicks, many of whom never see their parents. Baby birds are pulled from their nests prematurely, or eggs are taken to incubate and the offspring hand-fed.

“We’ll pull the baby. We’ll pull the eggs. It was all very cut and dry,” says Freed, the Kansas breeder. “Aviculturists simplified it. That way it was very easy to justify.”

Many of the parents continue to scream and search for their lost young for days afterward. It’s not uncommon for breeders to be attacked by a mourning parent several weeks later.

‘They hate me’

Lori Rutledge, who runs Cockatoo Rescue and Sanctuary in Stanwood, once complimented a local breeder who kept his birds in large outdoor cages.

“I said to him, ‘Your birds must absolutely love you for giving them this much space, fresh air and sunshine,’” Rutledge recalled. “He said, ‘They think I am the devil. They hate me. I take their babies. You should hear them scream.’”

Captivity compromises parrots’ social structure and culture. Parrots, like humans, can learn, scientists have found. Those born in captivity often have problems breeding as adults because they have had no models of natural behavior.

After years of supplying babies, old breeding birds that are not pet quality and unable to produce either are sold or killed.

Only five states – Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Maryland and New York – regulate bird breeding for the pet trade, according to the Animal Protection Institute, a Sacramento-based animal advocacy organization that monitors local and national regulation of this kind.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is drafting an amendment to the Animal Welfare Act that would include minimum care standards for birds. The amended law is expected to be years off.

---------------

About this report
Reporting for today’s stories initially was conducted for an upcoming book by investigative journalist Mira Tweti of Los Angeles.

Tweti, whose articles have appeared in The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, The Village Voice, LA Weekly and numerous magazines, has written extensively on parrots, the pet bird trade, and animal welfare issues and legislation.

In researching her book, she has conducted more than 300 interviews with scientists, avian researchers, veterinarians, ecological economists, breeders, pet bird owners, bird clubs, pet-bird industry executives and employees, federal law enforcement officers, animal control officers, avian rescue, sanctuaries and pet welfare organizations, legislators, environmentalists, conservationists and other sources in the United States and around the world.

During her research, she learned of Scudder’s Parrot Depot and traveled to Western Washington to pursue the story.

She returned to Washington state this fall to conduct several interviews and do further investigation. Working with News Tribune editors, she adapted a chapter of her book into today’s stories, which also include information she gathered exclusively for The News Tribune.

Washington animal cruelty law

 • A person is guilty of animal cruelty in the first degree when, except as authorized in law, he or she intentionally (a) inflicts substantial pain on, (b) causes physical injury to, or (c) kills an animal by a means causing undue suffering, or forces a minor to inflict unnecessary pain, injury or death on an animal.

 • A person is guilty of animal cruelty in the first degree when, except as authorized by law, he or she, with criminal negligence, starves, dehydrates or suffocates an animal and as a result causes: (a) substantial and unjustifiable physical pain that extends for a period sufficient to cause considerable suffering; or (b) death.

 • Animal cruelty in the first degree is a class C felony.

Genny
    12/19/05 at 09:28 PMReply with quote#2

The legislative issue is important in the Scudder case, and in every other case, of alleged animal cruelty.
 
The Scudders case was hoped by some in WA (and elsewhere) to be a platform to enact oppressive regulations on all bird breeders which included warrantless entry into homes.    Even if the situation was, or is, as bad as the worst allegations which have been made against the Scudders, I don't believe that one bad situation is, or even a few bad situations are, sufficient to justify empowering government agents to intrude into the lives and homes of other bird breeders who are not abusing their animals.     There must be some very compelling reason to allow government agents to invade people's homes, and there must be some reasonableness to our laws.
 
Every piece of proposed animal legislation must be evaluated on its own merits.    We always have to ask - will this statute (law, etc) actually do something to help animals, or will it be used to hurt those who keep animals?     We also always have to ask if this proposed statute violates the rights of the humans who will be subject to its provisions.    There is no perfect piece of legislation (animal or otherwise) - they all have their positive and negative points.
 
I have not been to the Scudder facility, Mira Tweti has not, Larry Gallawa has not, so none of us can truthfully tell anyone what the facility conditions were or are.     But Laurella has been there, the vet noted in the article has, I understand that some of the Pierce county board have, and animal control personnel have.     I doubt if any of them are lying about what they saw.    There is a difference of opinion among some of them on how they viewed the conditions at the location.     
 
There is a saying in the legal profession - eye witness evidence is not reliable, since people all perceive the same thing in different ways.   So how do we "judge" if a situation has deteriorated to a condition where intervention is needed?    What standard should we apply?    Whose judgment do we rely on?     Who should take up the charge of making sure that our animals are protected?     Who should have the power to enforce our animal cruelty laws?
 
One glaring point that I see in the Scudder case is that there were then, and there are now, existing anti-cruelty statutes in the State of Washington which include birds.    These statutes have criminal penalties for animal abuse.   
 
Specifically, RCW 16.52.207 makes it a crime if someone "Fails to provide the animal with necessary shelter, rest, sanitation, space, or medical attention and the animal suffers unnecessary or unjustifiable physical pain as a result of the failure; "     No charges were brought against the Scudders under that section that I am aware of.
 
RCW 16.52.085 allows an animal control officer, with a warrant, to remove an animal for care or place the animal under protective custody if the officer believes that the animal abuse statute has been violated.    If the animal is in a life-threatening situation the officer may act without a warrant.   They may euthanize siezed animals or place them for adoption after 15 days of the seizure date.    They may euthanize severly injured, diseased, or suffering animals immediately.    None of this happened in the Scudder case that I am aware of.
 
If the conditions at the Scudder aviary were as deplorable as some have stated, the animal control officers had the right and the power to issue citations, remove, euthanize, and/or place animals, and refer the Scudders for criminal prosecution.    They could have taken photographs to document any abuse to use in a criminal case.     No criminal case was filed that I am aware of.     That tells me that those charged with enforcing the animal abuse statutes did not feel they could even bring charges (much less prove them) given the situation as they observed and as they could document it.
 
What this also tells me that the animal control officers and the vet who inspected the facility did not feel the conditions which they observed at the Scudders were so bad that they required them to take any steps which would have been authorized under the existing statutes to prevent cruelty to the birds.
 
If anyone has evidence to the contrary, please let's see it.    By that I mean evidence of any criminal charges filed against Scudder, pleadings, documentary evidence of any criminal charges or any citations issued.
 
Regardless of the facts and the ultimate outcome of the Scudder case, I don't believe that adding another layer of legislation on top of the existing statutes in WA would produce any better result for the Scudder birds (or any other birds).     The statutes already in place in WA provide all the authority and power needed for those charged with enforcing WA animal cruelty laws to do their job.    Someone chose not to exercise that authority.
 
I asked earlier who should take up the charge of protecting our animals?    To me, the obvious answer is that this task is to be carried out by the agents of law enforcement and the courts using the laws that are in place for these purposes.     They understand the law and what is required under the law better than those who are not part of "the system".     They understand what legal and practical hurdles must be crossed in order to prove that the law has been violated.     They understand what resources are available in their jurisdictions to offer to animals truly in need.    And sometimes they make the judgment call that perhaps it is better to leave animals in less than optimal situations than to remove and ultimately euthanize them.
 
This task cannot be carried out by self appointed animal vigilante groups, nor by self appointed animal welfare groups, nor even by well-meaning concerned citizens who think they know what is best for animals.    If we go outside the established system of justice that has served us reasonably well for centuries we open ourselves to the changing whims of those who take interest, for now, in any particular issue.    I don't want to be part of such a flawed system of "justice".
 
Off my soapbox
 
Genny


Susan
    12/19/05 at 09:39 PMReply with quote#3

Myra has been to Scudders.  Some of your information is flawed.

Genny
    12/20/05 at 12:29 AMReply with quote#4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Susan

Some of your information is flawed.

Hi Susan,

 

Perhaps it is - I don't claim to have a crystal ball

 

If Ms Tweti has been to the Scudder's place, let's have the details.   When, on what authority, in whose company, with whose permission, and who can verify that?

 

As I stated in my post, if you (or someone else) has some credible documentary evidence, let's see it.    Photos, pleadings, criminal citations, something with some credibility, not just someone's opinion stated in a newspaper article.    Without that, all we have are allegations, which, together with 5 bucks will get you a Starbucks coffee.

 

Genny

luciedove
    12/20/05 at 12:00 PMReply with quote#5

Parrots in peril

Roy breeding operation leaves birds in squalor, and despite complaints and investigations, Pierce County Council rejects change in ordinance

MIRA TWETI; For The News Tribune
Published: December 18th, 2005 02:30 AM

Photo1
DREW PERINE/THE NEWS TRIBUNE
Light through cage wires silhouettes a parrot at Martha Scudder’s Parrot Depot in Roy. The breeding operation has sparked complaints to the Humane Society for Tacoma and Pierce County, as well as to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Officials who’ve visited the facility say it fails to meet humane care standards.
Photo2
WORLD PARROT TRUST
Hyacinth macaws can reach 3 feet in length.
Photo3
PETER HALEY/THE NEWS TRIBUNE
Larry Gallawa, with his Umbrella cockatoo Bailey, works from his home office in Redmond. The engineer and animal lover has worked for years to get officials to clean up Martha Scudder’s Parrot Depot in Roy.

Related Information
"Factory farming" approach takes toll
More about the world of parrots
 
<a href="http://ads.nandomedia.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/story/425366574/Button15/Tribnet/0512-NewellHunt-300-N09/0511-NewellHunt-300-N09.html/34346164303564653433613832613430?http://www.newellhunt.com" target=_blank target=_blank target=_blank><IMG SRC="http://ads.nandomedia.com/RealMedia/ads/Creatives/Tribnet/0512-NewellHunt-300-N09/" WIDTH=300 HEIGHT=250 BORDER=0></a>
At Martha Scudder’s Parrot Depot in Roy, hundreds of parrots, including many endangered species, have lived in cold, wet, filthy conditions for years, according to eyewitness accounts, experts, deposed testimony and scores of post-mortem reports.

The people and documents indicate Scudder’s has neglected hundreds, and possibly thousands, of parrots over its 25-year history. A veterinarian working with the Humane Society for Tacoma and Pierce County called the 5-acre farm on 332nd Street South a “concentration camp” for birds.

Plastic sheeting covers eight ramshackle wooden sheds. It flaps in the wind and offers little protection to the 800 parrots living there. At least one roof has been leaking unfixed for years, according to the veterinarian in a lawsuit deposition. Seven other sheds are equally dilapidated.

Several complaints about Scudder’s have been made to the Humane Society and one to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Plus, animal control inspectors have checked the property and warned Scudder that they believe the facility violates the state’s animal cruelty law.

Still, not a single bird has been removed or a fine issued.

In the past, Scudder has denied her birds are mistreated or diseased. She has said in a legal document that she cleans the birds’ cages only monthly during breeding season so as not to disrupt the process.

Her partner, Bob Vincent, declined a request from The News Tribune to see their aviaries and, after agreeing to an interview that included Scudder, did not return several phone calls to set the meeting.

Reached last week, their attorney, Jack Maichel, declined to make Scudder and Vincent available for an interview. A message left Friday at Scudder’s home was not returned.

The story of Scudder’s, which is considered the largest parrot-breeding operation in Washington state, is a drama marked by legal battles, family feuding and estrangement. Primarily, it reveals how little protection there is for birds in the pet trade and how little oversight there is for bird-breeding businesses, locally and nationally.

Parrots were the fastest-growing pet of choice through the 1990s. An estimated 50 million to 60 million of the pet birds live in the United States today. Each year, breeders produce about 2 million young parrots.

According to two Washington state experts, veterinarian Tracy Bennett and former parrot broker Lori Rutledge, a big percentage of the state’s major breeding facilities for large parrots keep their charges in bad conditions – a situation other experts say occurs nationwide.

Nevertheless, no federal legislation protects birds in the pet trade. Neither do measures in most states, including Washington. Basically, anyone with a patch of land can set up shop as a bird breeder away from prying eyes and without minimum care standards.

The problems at Scudder’s continue, in part because of inaction by the Humane Society and the Pierce County Council.

Until this year, the county contracted with the Humane Society to provide animal control and shelter services, and the administrative infrastructure to support them.

The Humane Society received five complaints against the breeder since 1999, citing filthy conditions, dead or deformed birds, overcrowded incubators and general neglect. Animal-control inspectors went to the farm each time, but no further action was taken.

When urged to oversee pet breeders, the County Council – which has the power to license, and thereby inspect and regulate the facilities – tabled an ordinance that would have required inspections.

For now it is just the birds at Scudder’s that suffer. But the threat of an avian flu pandemic raises the question: Is public health at risk from thousands of exotic birds being kept in unlicensed, unregulated and unmonitored circumstances in Pierce County and across the state?

New parrot fan gets involved

The situation at Scudder’s came to light in part through Seattle resident Larry Gallawa, an engineer by trade and an animal lover by vocation. His battle against Scudder led her to sue him for defamation, a lawsuit a judge eventually dismissed.

Gallawa’s passion for animals revolved around cats and dogs until a decade ago, when his daughter, Ronda, got a state job that required her to travel.

She asked her parents to take care of Bailey, her 3-year-old Umbrella cockatoo. They did, and he’s been with them ever since.

“I take him everywhere,” said Gallawa, 59, “in the car, to the supermarket, to the dry cleaners. There’s not many places he hasn’t been.”

Now smitten with parrots, Gallawa endeavored to learn as much as possible about them.

He found out parrots test higher than most primates on intelligence tests and that the average parrot is believed to have the intelligence of a 3- or 4-year-old child. Parrots can master large vocabularies and speak in sentences with comprehension, and even learn to count. Sophisticated, complex and social animals, parrots bond for life and are more loyal than dogs. And, unlike dogs, they are long-lived: A large parrot can live to 100.

Gallawa also found a local expert, Lori Rutledge at Cockatoo Rescue, a parrot sanctuary in Stanwood, who told him about parrot-breeding conditions in the state. Rutledge estimates Washington has 20 large exotic bird-breeding facilities and countless smaller ones.

Eventually she got around to talking about Scudder’s, which Rutledge said had a bad reputation.

“I’d heard that so many times from so many people it was almost an urban legend,” she said in an interview. “Everybody that had anything to do with the bird-breeding business knew about Scudder’s.”

Not liking what he was hearing, Gallawa contacted the Progressive Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) in Lynnwood in late 2002.

Two volunteers, Donna Diduch and Stephanie Beecroft, went to check out Scudder’s, saying they were interested in buying a bird.

Scudder, 65, wouldn’t allow them into the aviaries, but what they saw in the main house prompted them to file a report with the Pierce County Humane Society. They wrote that the place was “dark, filthy and cold.” One parrot was lying on its stomach, obviously sick and in distress. Scudder said it was fine.

After reading the report, Gallawa insisted Wally Hall, field coordinator for the Humane Society, go with an avian veterinarian for an inspection. Tracy Bennett got the call.

Veterinarian visits

Of about 85,000 veterinarians in the United States, 97 are certified for avian practice by the American Board of Veterinary Practitioners. Avian certification is considered the hardest to get because birds are behaviorally complex, physiologically unique and there are so many different species.

Bennett, 40, is one of the 97. For the last 11 years, parrots have made up 90 percent of her practice at the Bird and Exotic Clinic of Seattle. When Bennett was called to inspect Scudder’s, she was one of three vets certified in avian practice in Washington state. (Now there are five.)

Although she’d never been there, Bennett had seen evidence of the situation at Scudder’s in her own veterinary office. Her findings and later impressions, stated in reports and letters to the Humane Society, became part of the defamation lawsuit against Gallawa.

Bennett said the new owners of several young birds from Scudder’s had brought them to her for veterinary care. She said they were uniformly in poor condition, tested positive for disease, showed signs of stress and were underweight.

On Jan. 23, 2003, the investigators went to Scudder’s, which Bennett later described in an interview as “horrifying – a scummy, filthy, horrible” place.

Bennett said the main house was filled with cages and filthy with feces.

“We went downstairs, and there was feces all down the wall,” Bennett said. “It was all green with it.”

Downstairs was the nursery where Scudder incubated and fed baby birds.

“Across from the babies were some incubators the size for chicks but one had an adult bird, and he barely fit,” Bennett said.

The next room was filled with birds in stacked wire cages.

“Some of the birds were brought in from the aviaries because Martha said she thought they were sick,” Bennett said. “Some had clubbed feet walking on bare wire, which was very bad. Others she was boarding and had no idea of their health status but they were mixed in with the rest.

“All of these were next to her nursery, close enough to contaminate the baby birds with any diseases they might have.”

Bennett said she saw only a fraction of the flock because Scudder would allow her into only two of the eight bird barns that house African Grey parrots, Amazons, macaws and different kinds of cockatoos, and some rare species, such as Vasa parrots.

Bennett described the aviaries as “rotten old ramshackle wooden shacks with hanging wire cages.”

“They had what I call ‘fecal stalagmites’ at least 6 inches high, maybe higher,” she said. “You would think seeing giant accumulation of feces would be a bad thing but Martha Scudder didn’t comprehend that. I got the impression that she saw no problem.”

The automatic watering system was leaking badly and poorly maintained, Bennett said. Where there were water bottles for the birds, algae was growing in them.

“Water was coming into the barns because the buildings were open to the elements,” she said. “It was bad, but at the time I was happy about it, because all the drinking water those birds would get is what they could lick off the bars.”

The birds that especially haunt Bennett are the ones left on their own.

“I remember this one double yellow-headed Amazon just sitting on the bottom of the wire cage – no perch, no mate – in this cold, rainy place in winter, sitting there alone with just filth underneath it,” Bennett said. “And I thought, ‘This is torture for this bird.’”

Questions over what to do

Hall, the Human Society field coordinator, and Bennett dispute what happened after the inspection. Hall said he asked Bennett what she wanted to do.

“I told her, ‘You’re in control. … Is there enough to pull (the birds)?’ And she said, ‘No, I believe we can work with Mrs. Scudder to clean it up.’”

Bennett said she didn’t want to wait.

“I told Wally Hall in the car that we needed to shut the place down,” she said. “He told me, ‘To shut it down, we need to show dead bodies.’ I told him birds were sick, and the conditions were deplorable.”

Hall’s now-retired assistant, Nancy Groves, 53, accompanied him and Bennett to Scudder’s. Groves said that, to the best of her recollection, Hall preferred not to take the birds but deferred to Bennett.

“Bennett said she didn’t think there was enough cause to pull the birds,” Groves said. “She wanted Scudder to reduce their number and said she would write a letter of recommendations” for improvements.

Retired Humane Society veterinarian Betsy Larson, 53, accompanied Hall and Bennett to Scudder’s. She said Bennett asked Scudder to relinquish the birds.

“The doctor said she knew rescue groups that would be very happy to take these birds immediately and give them a wonderful home,” Larson said.

According to Bennett, Hall told Scudder he knew she had good intentions but, because her husband had died, the place had fallen into neglect. She had to make repairs, he said.

“He figured she’ll just fix it up and everything will be fine,” Bennett said. “They didn’t want to make waves, and they didn’t want to get stuck with 500 birds. They told me it was very hard to take these things to court.”

Larson explained the difficulties in having to prove animal cruelty in court.

“It’s not the seizing of the animals that’s hard, it’s building your case,” she said. “With abuse cases, you don’t get people’s attention sometimes until there are dead animals – overt suffering that the layperson, the judge and the court will recognize.

“Here we get into how to make this case in a court of law. This is why it’s so hard to go after puppy mills and places that raise animals. Nothing’s worse than having the animals go back after a year.”

Confiscation of animals rarely happens on animal control inspections, Hall said. “It is a lot easier to work with someone to change their attitude,” he said.

Confirming the birds were sick would take work, Bennett said. As a defense mechanism, they mask their illnesses. Plus, many severe illnesses can have mild signs, such as lethargy, anorexia and ruffled feathers, that make them hard to confirm without a blood test.

Bennett said she told Hall she could prove the animals were sick if they let her run tests.

“They said there was no money for that,” Bennett said.

Based on Hall’s stance, Bennett sent a report March 7, 2003, outlining recommendations for improvements. Among a long list of actions, Bennett wrote that Scudder should get rid of most of her birds, reducing their numbers to fewer than 100, replace the watering system and improve the birds’ diet.

Bennett also reported Scudder’s to the local U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service office, citing ill health of the endangered birds and the conditions she’d seen. She later faxed a list of the endangered species.

Citing confidentiality issues, Fish & Wildlife supervisor Philip Knudsen in Redmond declined to comment on any follow-up that might have been done on the complaint.

Steve Pierce, Hall’s boss, said he called Bennett after reading her report. He said he was appalled by the sanitation conditions she described.

“I spoke to her personally and talked to her about seizing those birds,” he said, “and I can promise you nowhere in that conversation did she tell me that we should seize those birds.”

Bennett said the opposite and that she felt sure Pierce would take action after they hung up. In retrospect, Bennett said, she should have plainly stated, “All these birds need to go and right now.”

Scudder received Bennett’s report, which had a deadline of May 31, 2003, for her to complete the changes. But she didn’t take the recommendations seriously.

Later, in deposed testimony in the lawsuit against Gallawa, Scudder said she thought Bennett’s recommendations “were not conducive to flock management” and that she didn’t feel required to reduce her flock just because the Humane Society sent her a letter saying so.

“She has no right telling me how to run my business,” Scudder said in a deposition, referring to Bennett.

On March 31, 2003, Hall got a written reply from Scudder, asking what right he had to make her change anything.

On April 16, Hall provided Bennett with the state’s animal cruelty statute and asked her to write a response outlining whether the situation at Scudder’s situation met the state’s requirements.

A week later, in a letter to Hall that became part of the defamation lawsuit, Bennett outlined how Scudder’s situation met the five points of the state’s cruelty regulation.

Scudder had balked at making the requested changes, and Hall had it in writing that the conditions were cruel under the law. So why didn’t he confiscate the birds?

“The intent of the communication was to go to Scudder so she could make changes,” Hall said. “It wasn’t for Wally Hall to get a search warrant to pull the birds.”

How the Scudders started

In the early 1960s, John and Martha Scudder moved from Moses Lake, Grant County, where their three boys were born, to Southern California. There, they bought their first bird, an Amazon parrot, at a swap meet.

They soon became hobbyist breeders, and by the time they bought land in Roy and moved the family to Washington in 1979, they had about 80 parrots. John Scudder drove a truck, and Martha worked at a hospital. By the early 1980s, they were selling birds commercially as a side business.

With three sons, there was plenty of help. The oldest, John Jr., planned to be a veterinarian and had been accepted to college. But when his father suffered a debilitating back injury that required several surgeries, John Jr. gave up that idea and took over his father’s truck route.

He married his first wife, Suzanne, had two sons, and started an aviary on the land adjacent to his parents.

Some blame the decline in the elder Scudder’s aviaries on John Sr.’s death from cancer in 2002. But John Jr. says they have been bad since the early 1980s, when he no longer was involved with them on a daily basis.

“Long before John (Sr.) got sick, those aviaries were never properly maintained,” he said in an interview. “You’d go out from one day to the next and birds would be dead in their cages. They thought of the parrots like livestock and saw themselves as management. It was someone else’s job to clean the cages and feed the birds. As they got bigger, they got worse.”

John Jr. said Martha rarely was in the aviaries taking care of the birds.

He said poisonous deadly nightshade vine grows into the parrots’ cages because the ground under them isn’t mowed, and the food dishes aren’t cleaned once a week as they need to be.

“They’d scrape them out rather than wash them, so they were never really cleaned properly,” he said. “Aspergillis bacteria, a mold that grows in the birds’ lungs, grows in them.”

After John Sr. went into the hospital, the birds were neglected so badly it was “scary” to go into the barns, said his daughter-in-law of 25 years, Robin Scudder, 42, who lives in Alaska and had been close friends with Martha Scudder.

“From 2000 on, things started getting really hairy, and the flock started dying,” she said in an interview.

Finally, John Jr. and Robin Scudder fired the caretaker.

“He would turn off the water system and forget to turn it back on and didn’t remember how many days it had been off,” Robin Scudder said.

The two cleaned the place up, but problems continued.

“Martha stopped taking birds out for necropsies to find out what had happened,” Robin Scudder said. “At first we buried them, but as the quantities jumped and jumped they went to the Dumpster. I know of at least 50 to 75 birds in the Dumpster.”

Family disagreement

John Scudder Jr., 47, and his wife, Kathy Scudder, 47, live on the 7 acres adjacent to Martha Scudder’s property. The two run their own aviary, Happy Hookbills Ranch, which has gotten a clean bill of health from Bennett.

Even so, says Kathy Scudder, Martha Scudder’s reputation has affected their business.

According to documents in the defamation lawsuit, Martha Scudder had Washington State University’s Disease Diagnostic Laboratory write necropsy reports on 90 birds that died at her farm. Those included 50 from 2002 to the first quarter of 2004.

Lab technicians found diagnoses of aspergillis, a long-term, chronic infection in which the bird dies gasping for breath; proventricular dilatation disease or PDD, a highly contagious virus commonly called “avian AIDS”; polyoma, which causes birds to bleed to death; and mycobacterium avium, an avian tuberculosis contagious to humans.

“I can’t sell birds in the Pacific Northwest because my last name is Scudder,” said Kathy Scudder. “And I won’t put my birds in the same stores with Martha’s anyway. I don’t know what diseases her birds have. If my bird gets sick, they’ll think it was sick from my place and say, ‘See, their birds are just like Martha’s.’”

John Jr. and Kathy Scudder had helped clean Martha Scudder’s barns for a follow-up inspection by the Humane Society on June 12, 2003.

This time, Bennett said, the birds’ condition still was worrisome. But she was optimistic for the first time because it looked as if Martha Scudder were going to have help from her family in running the aviaries.

That didn’t happen, in part because that August, Martha became involved with Vincent, 49.

By all accounts, Martha Scudder had been deeply saddened by the death of her husband 18 months earlier.

“Martha was at her lowest and looking for anyone,” Kathy Scudder said. “Bob was supposed to do the feeding, cleaning and landscaping. The next thing that we know Bob is no longer the worker – Bob is the lover.”

Then, after Vincent and Kathy Scudder got into a shoving match, Martha Scudder took out a restraining order against her eldest son and his wife. There now are mutual restraining orders between the families.

John Jr. and Kathy offered to take Martha Scudder off their restraining order, but she refused if they wouldn’t accept Vincent on her terms.

“I’d love to see the animals taken care of properly, but there’s nothing I can do about it anymore with the restraining order,” John Jr. said.

When Robin Scudder moved to Alaska, she boarded some of her birds at Martha Scudder’s. She says in a court document taken as part of the Gallawa lawsuit that Vincent told her 10 birds died, though she was never told the circumstances. He sent her a certified letter ordering her to come and get the rest of the birds when she visited Roy in December 2004.

When she came, the cages were in front of Martha Scudder’s house for her to collect. The birds were in terrible shape, Robin Scudder said.

“I opened the Amazon’s nest box and there was a nest of mice,” she said, “and the two Umbrellas’ (cockatoos) nest box had so much fecal matter in their shavings it was just soup.”

Last August, Robin Scudder came to Washington to visit Kathy and John Jr. and ran into the garbage collector who services both Scudder properties.

“The Dumpster guy says, ‘Robin Scudder, where the devil have you been? And what’s going on with your mom? Do you know the amount of birds that have gone in the Dumpster since you left?’”

The conditions at the farm

Vivian Graves, a friend of Martha Scudder for six years, moved her mobile home onto Martha’s property 21/2 years ago. She lived rent-free with utilities in exchange for taking care of the birds.

Until the end of September of this year, Graves was the caretaker for the aviaries and has most recently seen the conditions there.

Graves says Vincent, who has taken over operation of the farm, wouldn’t allow the birds to be fed until so late in the day that she often had to use a flashlight to feed them after dark in the winter.

That doesn’t work for parrots, which rise at dawn and sleep at dusk, Bennett said. The birds need fresh food in the morning because they awaken hungry and need energy for the day.

The watering system, which Bennett wanted replaced, still “leaks like a sieve,” causing cesspools under the birds’ cages of moldy seeds and feces, with flies everywhere, Graves said.

“It was disgusting,” she said.

Vincent has covered the cages of some of the birds, depriving them of daylight to facilitate their breeding, she said. However, Bennett pointed out, keeping birds in the dark produces the opposite result, because the birds’ internal breeding clock is based on following the sun.

“Every time I brought up the idea that those birds cannot see anything,” Graves said, “they’re not getting any sun, that it’s not healthy, they’d say, ‘You’re trying to make pets out of everything.’”

Graves said the birds are deprived of heat in the winter and, without perches, some freeze their toes off on the cage wire.

In her deposition, Martha Scudder said she provides heat only when “absolutely necessary.” She contended her birds are acclimated and don’t require heat because they are “neotropical.”

In fact, virtually all parrots need warmth because they do not have the thick down that insulates birds from cold climates. The term “neotropical” means only that the birds are from the tropical areas in and near South America.

Tropical birds don’t become acclimated to the cold, Bennett said. At best, their immune systems become compromised. At worst, they die.

Vincent and Martha Scudder brought legal action to evict Graves. She recently moved to Utah but said she felt compelled to come forward with what she knew about the Scudder operation.

“I always thought of myself as a stand-up kind of person,” she said. “I can’t walk away knowing what I know and having seen what I’ve seen and not try to do something to make it better. I felt ashamed that I was letting the birds down.”

Details from depositions

After Bennett’s two visits and without any action by the Humane Society, Gallawa went online to avian Internet chat rooms in fall 2003 to rally support and raise awareness of the conditions at Scudder’s.

On March 2, 2004, Martha Scudder and Vincent sued Gallawa for defamation and damage to their business resulting from his comments.

“After two years of discovery and everything, he has yet to pull up one document that we have exotic Newcastle disease or some of these other things (like) psitticosis,” Vincent said in a phone interview with The News Tribune.

Gallawa denies ever saying the Scudder birds had those diseases and contends he only quoted from Bennett’s report. Nevertheless, he welcomed the lawsuit.

“Most people aren’t happy to get sued, but I was ecstatic. It meant Martha Scudder had to open her life to inspection,” Gallawa said. “Under our state laws, my attorneys could go in and seize documents which otherwise wouldn’t be available and that’s exactly what they did.”

Among the documents subpoenaed were the necropsy reports by the WSU laboratory.

“The most shocking,” Bennett said, are the necropsies showing birds died of Pacheco’s disease, a highly contagious and sometimes fatal herpes virus.

Most of Scudder’s ill birds would have looked very thin before they died, Bennett said in an interview.

“The PDD birds are emaciated to look at,” he said. “They died with no one ever caring, taking them to the doctor, or putting them in a warm area.”

Martha Scudder had an expert of her own testify in the lawsuit about the necropsy reports.

Brian Speer, a board-certified avian vet and a bird breeder, testified that some of the reports were inconclusive and that there was no proof the birds had psitticosis and exotic Newcastle disease.

“There were diseases present, just not those,” he later told The News Tribune.

Martha Scudder, under oath in deposed testimony in the lawsuit, contended there were no diseases in her aviaries and said no bird had died of starvation.

However, Kathy Scudder said Martha Scudder once pointed out a bird and identified it as dying of PDD.

“That bird was laying in the bottom of the cage. It wasn’t even able to get up on a perch,” Kathy Scudder said in a deposition. “It was skin and feathers and bones. Two days later, she told me the bird was dead. It did not receive medical treatment and it was not euthanized. She just let it waste away until it died.”

In the end, the judge hearing the lawsuit ruled Martha Scudder couldn’t prove damages from Gallawa’s actions and dismissed the legal action. Scudder and Vincent asked the judge for reconsideration and were denied. They are now appealing the ruling.

An appeal to county council

To crack down on bad breeders, Gallawa lobbied the Pierce County Council in mid-2003 to have the Kennel, Cattery, Grooming Parlor and Pet Store Ordinance include aviaries. The expanded ordinance would have allowed inspection of any aviary wanting a license and would permit follow-up checks without advance notice.

All that was required was adding the word “aviaries” to the ordinance with the number of birds defining an aviary. (A license is required for six or more cats and dogs.)

The Humane Society’s Pierce said expanding the ordinance would enable animal control to monitor Scudder’s facility in a meaningful way.

“We were working with Scudder’s voluntarily for nine months, then they shut their doors to us,” he said. “Then there was no way to verify they were continuing to do what we were asking them to do. If we’d had a license program in place, we could continue to access the property.”

Hall said the measure would help animal control officers do a better job.

“If we had like a kennel license,” he said, “they would have to be clean, they would have to have their food in airtight containers so there’s no rodents. They have to clean up after their animals, they have to dispose of things in a certain way. Now we’re just relying on the cruelty law for birds, and they do fall between the cracks.”

He said he thought four aviaries he knew of in Pierce County would not meet the standards of a revised ordinance.

The breeders were quick to react.

“We had a mountain of people against it,” County Councilman Dick Muri said. “Dozens and dozens of my constituents (were) calling me, saying we didn’t need to regulate because there was a system in place.”

Muri said he thought 90 percent of those who contacted him were breeders or bird hobbyists with an interest in keeping the status quo.

Muri went out to see Scudder’s before a hearing on the proposed ordinance and was welcomed by Martha Scudder and Vincent. Muri toured the property and didn’t see anything amiss.

“That in itself doesn’t mean anything,” Hall says. “Of course, they are going to have the place looking spick-and-span when they know someone like that is coming out.”

And Graves said she, Martha Scudder and Vincent would “clean for days” if someone important were coming to the farm.

The County Council held a hearing on the ordinance Feb. 24, 2004, and breeders argued against the amendment and the inspections it would bring.

One after another, 11 breeders said they either didn’t think they needed regulation, or that any inspection would be disruptive for the birds and would cause serious problems if strangers came into the aviaries.

As a result, they said, the county would have to pay what could be thousands of dollars in damages.

“The minute anybody comes in that the birds don’t know, the chance for disease and stress is very high,” said Jonna Kelly, co-owner of the Cripple Creek Avian breeding farm. “What happens if a vet comes out and any number of these birds that they’re inspecting die? Whose fault is that? Who eats that money? Who replaces the birds?”

Also testifying against the amendment was Laurella Desborough, then the legislative vice president of the American Federation of Aviculture, the largest organization in the U.S. representing the breeding community.

“We see this as an issue that could affect birds not just in this county but throughout the country when ordinances are proposed,” said Desborough, who traveled from Florida to testify. “If a stranger walks through a breeding aviary, and this is my concern about inspections, you can end up with scrambled eggs, dead chicks, damaged or dead mates.”

The organization’s president, Benny Gallaway, later said Desborough was not authorized to speak on its behalf.

Desborough also said at the hearing that the U.S. Department of Agriculture was about to pass legislation regulating aviaries and that a Pierce County ordinance would be redundant. In fact, the USDA officials drafting the legislation do not expect federal legislation to be enacted for at least five years.

Local breeders also were adamant that, though they had no diseases at their facilities, inspectors would have to don protective suits so as to not transmit any diseases from other facilities. And, they added, that while protective suits were absolutely necessary, they would traumatize the birds to such a degree as to make inspections impossible.

Hall and Pierce argued that the revised ordinance would help them do their jobs. Bennett testified and discounted the breeders’ concerns.

In the end, the breeders prevailed. Without further consideration, examination or investigation, the council tabled the proposal.

Chairwoman Barbara Gelman ended the hearing saying, “This is not an issue that is going to be decided on at this particular committee meeting. We’re going to have other committee meetings and other hearings.”

None has been held in almost two years since.

“This is not an (ordinance) where the public is beating down our doors,” Councilman Shawn Bunney said later. “There was no public outcry and we didn’t have compelling evidence to do anything.”

In addition, he said, it was a strike against the proposition that its main advocate, Gallawa, was from outside the county.

“In hindsight,” Bunney said, “I can reflect that maybe we should go back and re-examine this issue.”

Bennett says the council fell for a smokescreen set up by the breeders.

“This is the tactic that they’ve come up with to say birds are so sensitive you can’t have anyone walk through their enclosures. It’s ridiculous and it’s just not true,” she said. “I’m an avian veterinarian, I certainly know how to walk through a facility without disturbing the birds. Quietly walking through and inspecting is not going to cause any of the problems they said.”

Laurence Hawkins, regional public affairs officer for U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, sides with Bennett and against the breeders.

“I sympathize with their concerns but I don’t believe that they’re valid,” he said. “Our people are very familiar with how to go into bird facilities, including handling parrots, to monitor them.”

Last hopes

Eighteen months ago, Gallawa was diagnosed with a rare kind of terminal cancer. It is his dying wish is to see Scudder’s aviary closed and the birds there in a safe place.

“I only hope,” he says, “I can make a difference in at least a small way that will make life better for these animals that deserve so much more than the human race has given them.”

  
     
Genny
    12/20/05 at 08:44 PMReply with quote#6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miriam

Genny, sue the papers for reporting false info.

 

Are you trying to insult our intelligence?

Hi Miriam,

 

I have no plans to sue anyone on this subject.

 

An no, I am not trying to insult you or anyone else.   What I am trying to do is asking people look at the big picture.    I am asking people to discard the mob mentality and consider what the "evidence" is in this case.

 

Anyone can allege anything about anyone.   It does not make it true.

 

Anyone can write an article and submit it to a newspaper for publication.   It does not make it true.

 

Any of us could be the subjects of these types of complaints at any time.   It does not make it true.

 

I am asking for credible and admissible evidence in this case, not yellow journalism.

 

Not too much to ask, is it?

 

Genny

Genny
    12/21/05 at 11:20 AMReply with quote#7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Genny
Quote:

 

Anyone can write an article and submit it to a newspaper for publication.   It does not make it true.

 

 

 Genny

If it's so easy as you claim, please submit your article to the newspapers stating your side.

 

 

 

 

Dear Guest 11,

 

As a lawyer I have a policy not to try cases in the press, and I will not do that

 

As a human being, I find it abhorrent that people are so willing to jump on the vigilante train based on some allegations in a newspaper article.

 

Genny

luciedove
    12/21/05 at 11:30 AMReply with quote#8

If it is so easy to get a story written up in the newspapers, I am quite sure the papers would have millions of articles published daily.

Ms. Tweti is an accomplished author, well-respected journalist, and I'm sure she would not write anything that is not true. 

Anyway, what is your agenda.  
Larry Gallawa
    12/21/05 at 02:08 PMReply with quote#9

My name is Larry Gallawa and I supplied the information for the article and supplied the documentation that the Tribune used to confirm my story. I had previously written an article called the Zone of Despair (about Pierce County)  I was the individual who pushed for and got the first public hearings on updating the abuse ordinances. The County has now agreed to reopen those hearings and hopefully they will be enacted but we need help to get it done.

 

Larry Gallawa
    12/21/05 at 03:40 PMReply with quote#10

I am sorry that my work has caused so much dispute among people who really need to read the available data before they jump tp conclusions. My name is Larry Gallawa. I am the source of Mira's story and have all of the documentation which supports the article. If you think it is easy to get a newspaper article published you have never tried. I spent 4 years in various courts and going through numerous records which my attornies got only through subpoenas. Public agencies blatantly violated the Freedom of information act on numerous occassions and made public statements as to the conditions at the Scudders and other places in that jurisdiction. Please do not take my word for it go to the King County Court House and ask for the records on Scudder vs Gallawa case # 04-2=04721-85ka. The King County court house is located in Seattle WA. Now the next thing is that I also have pictures and numerous other records that I am willing to share. I am responding to this chain only to quiet a few who obviously dont know what they are talking about. Please educate yourself and READ the information and then come back and make your claims of unsubstantiated articles and you will find there is enough documentation to have written a much more skathing article. The one in the tribune was polite concidering the documents I have.

Genny
    12/21/05 at 04:33 PMReply with quote#11

Quote:
Originally Posted by luciedove
If it is so easy to get a story written up in the newspapers, I am quite sure the papers would have millions of articles published daily.

Ms. Tweti is an accomplished author, well-respected journalist, and I'm sure she would not write anything that is not true. 

Anyway, what is your agenda.  

The publication world is built on dollars - what "sells" is what gets published.    Sadly, in many cases, facts take a back seat to sales in publishing.    All publications have limited resources, and publish what brings readers to their product.

Salacious and lurid articles, such as those written by Ms. Tweti sell well, whip people into a frenzy, and bring eyeballs to the publiction - so newspapers gobble them up.     Eyeballs bring advertising dollars.

Those tiresome, boring, lucid, and factual articles that don't have an exciting agenda to push, that many people don't want to bother to read, don't sell as well and don't bring eyeballs to the publication, so newspapers don't usually publish them.

My "agenda", as you would like to call it, is simple.   I present facts and rational thinking in those areas where it seems that some people want all of us to operate on assumptions, fantasy, and hysteria.    I ask people to look at all of the facts and to use their brains to sort the facts from the yellow journalism.    Pretty radical agenda, I'd say.

People who choose to think will look at both sides of any issue and make their decisions based on facts.     Those who choose not to think for themselves will accept whatever is presented to them by those who agree with their preconceived notions.

Acceptance on Faith vs. Critical Thinking.

If you don't like to think, don't read my posts    

Genny
Genny
    12/21/05 at 04:41 PMReply with quote#12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Gallawa

My name is Larry Gallawa and I supplied the information for the article and supplied the documentation that the Tribune used to confirm my story. I had previously written an article called the Zone of Despair (about Pierce County)  I was the individual who pushed for and got the first public hearings on updating the abuse ordinances. The County has now agreed to reopen those hearings and hopefully they will be enacted but we need help to get it done.

 

 

Hi Larry,

 

I know you have volumes of material to share with interested persons, as you have shared much of it with me in the past.

 

In the spirit of full disclosure, so that people can get a balanced picture of who you are and what you stand for, will you please post some of the threatening letters that you sent to the Pierce County board when they refused to enact the ordinance you were seeking.    I found them to be quite enlightening.

 

Thank you.

 

Genny

Larry gallawa
    12/21/05 at 05:30 PMReply with quote#13

Would you please be a bit clearer in your request. As you know I have easilly substantiated through sworn testimoney, Washington State Vet school Necropsies, Board certified avian vet inspection reports, Humane Society laying out in coorespondence state law violations of animal abuse statutes. I also would like to know who you are. I know that the Scudders have many friends who will defend them no matter what proof is brought forward. I have no idea of who you are but at least am willing to back up my beleifs with hard documentation (including Martha's own testimony under oath). I also have put forward my name. So my guess is that based on the writing style and the adamant support of this breeder that you are in fact Jenny Wall.   Did I win a cigar???

luciedove
    12/21/05 at 05:39 PMReply with quote#14

Genny,

Even before this article appeared on our board, you have been a source of irritation challenging every effort that we try to make to give birds back their dignity, life and self image.

It makes me wonder what kind of person you are and what motivates your need to try to destroy anything positive that we try to do on behalf of these creatures who have been taken hostage, separated from their natural environment and family, forced into a cage without their wings and forced to breed against their will.  

I can only guess that you are part and parcel of the Bloodsuckers that titles this thread. 

The fact that you are taking time off from your law practice to scour messages on our board and trying to take away credibility from Mira Tweti, gives me hope however that maybe we people who are trying to do something positive for avians are making some headway -- maybe there IS a light at the end of the tunnel that we should go towards. This only fuels our energies even more, to know that we are on the right track.

Thank you Genny for showing us the way. 

If YOU have evidence to substantiate anything different than what is written in the article, I invite you to write it on the board.



       

   
Genny
    12/21/05 at 05:44 PMReply with quote#15

Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry gallawa

Would you please be a bit clearer in your request. As you know I have easilly substantiated through sworn testimoney, Washington State Vet school Necropsies, Board certified avian vet inspection reports, Humane Society laying out in coorespondence state law violations of animal abuse statutes. I also would like to know who you are. I know that the Scudders have many friends who will defend them no matter what proof is brought forward. I have no idea of who you are but at least am willing to back up my beleifs with hard documentation (including Martha's own testimony under oath). I also have put forward my name. So my guess is that based on the writing style and the adamant support of this breeder that you are in fact Jenny Wall.   Did I win a cigar???

 

As always, Larry, you jump to conclusions.   The one you got right was yes, I am Genny Wall.    And no, you don't win a cigar

 

The rest of your conclusions in this particular post, including my "adamant support of this breeder" are just your fantasies.     I don't know Mrs. Scudder from Adam.    I don't support or oppose her.    I only want to know what the facts are.     So far, from what I have seen, I am not convinced that she needs to be shut down.

 

I ask people to look at ALL the facts, not just those that they want to look at.

 

Please focus on what I actually wrote in my post to you.   You claim to have lots of facts, a claim that I did not challenge.    I asked you to provide a particular set of communications which you made to the Pierce County board members.   Are you willing to do that?

 

Genny

Previous Thread | Next Thread
Page 1 of 15   1  |  2  |  3  |  4 >  » Last
Reply

  Bookmarks  
Digg DiggFacebook Facebookdel.icio.us del.icio.usStumbleUpon StumbleUponGoogle Google
Twitter TwitterWindows Live Favorites Windows Live FavoritesTechnorati Tags Technorati Tagsreddit reddit

communication: bestbirdclub@yahoo.com
disclaimer: we do not verify the accuracy of your posting and assume no responsibility for its content.