For Immediate Release: 12 November 2009

Contacts:

Lee Hall, Legal Director, Friends of Animals
E-mail: leehall[AT]friendsofanimals.org
Internet: www.friendsofanimals.org
Local (Pennsylvania) Internet: www.foaphilly.org

Michael Harris, Director of the Environmental Law Clinic, University of Denver Sturm College of Law
E-mail: mharris[AT]law.du.edu

Philadelphia, PA — Friends of Animals, an advocacy organization founded in 1957, is suing the U.S. National Park Service to stop a proposed deer-control plan for Valley Forge National Historical Park.

Just a few minutes west of Philadelphia, Valley Forge Park is historically known as a six-month headquarters for George Washington during the Continental Army’s encampment in 1777. Today, it is known as a five-mile spot of peace and safety for animal life in the midst of suburban shopping malls and road works.

Under the government’s “White-Tailed Deer Management Plan,” however, rifle-toting agents would enter the park to kill the vast majority of the deer this winter, continuing the same way for at least four years.

“The government’s desire to deploy a rifle team to war on the deer lacks biological, ecological, and ethical sense,” said Lee Hall, legal director for Friends of Animals.

“That park officials would actually encourage local residents to believe deer have no business on the land the minute they do something inconvenient — even including the ingestion of ornamental plants — is not responsible leadership.”

Allison Memmo Geiger, president of co-plaintiff CARE (Compassion for Animals, Respect for the Environment), said, “Valley Forge National Historic Park’s managers and the National Park Service have displayed a lack of respect for nature, for those of us who enjoy and pass through the park, and for the deer whose habitat is the park.”

Noting that the government proposal includes spending future years controlling the deer with a lab-created birth control substance, Geiger stated, “I’m not sure which is worse — shooting deer or wreaking havoc on their biology and their social and reproductive interactions by imposing birth control on them.”

Additionally, the suit charges that shooting the deer endangers public safety and ignores local laws. Eerie Insurance Company research shows that cars hit deer the most when the deer are being hunted, with the opening day of hunting season and the first Saturday of hunting season being the highest days for these accidents.

“The park has decided it’s OK to discharge firearms in this small park so close to roads and developments — adding to the mix a population of suddenly frightened deer? This is unacceptable,” said Geiger.

The deer are not responsible for the park’s manicured lawns, for deliberate removals of natural vegetation over the years and the planting of non-native foliage, for a lack of respect for the animals comprising the park’s natural food web, for paved areas and buildings, for more than a million visitors per year, vehicle exhaust, or for the constant presence of (often speeding) cars. These factors must be addressed directly to address the pressure on the deer, Friends of Animals and CARE have urged.

The lawsuit alleges the Park Service’s White-tailed Deer Management Plan for the Valley Forge National Historical Park violates federal law, including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Organic Act and the park’s enabling legislation.

“Decisions under the National Environmental Policy Act cannot be based simply on seizing upon the apparently easiest answer to a perceived problem, said Hall. “Killing deer is not the answer to the decline of plant life in a sprawling, concrete-covered suburb.”

“Like any conscious beings, moreover, deer need special concern in decisions involving the ecological balance of a space; and our government needs to stop disregarding common sense and ethics.”

The suit names Mike Caldwell, Superintendent of Valley Forge National Historical Park, the National Park Service, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, National Park Service Director Jon Jarvis, and National Park Service Regional Director for the Northeast Dennis R. Reidenbach.

On behalf of Friends of Animals and CARE, Lee Hall expressed appreciation for the outstanding legal work on the case by the University of Denver - Sturm College of Law Environmental Law Clinic, directed by Professor Michael Harris. The lawsuit is being filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama,

We, the members and supporters of Friends of Animals, located in every state and in several countries, firmly oppose the Bureau of Land Management’s proposal to round up and remove yet more of free-roaming wild horses and burros from U.S. public lands in a scheme to place the horses in holding sites, sterilize them, and privatize them, all at U.S. taxpayers’ expense. There are few sustainable or genetically viable herds left, and they must be respected: not sterilized, not privatized.

At the beginning of the 20th century, 2 million mustangs roamed free.(1) Today, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar tells reporters, “We have a huge problem — out-of-control populations of wild horses and burros on our public lands.”(2) But the reporters also note that 37,000 free-roaming horses and burros remain on public lands. (The actual number varies depending on the estimate being cited, and might be far less than that.) The round-up policy itself is the huge problem, as it has resulted in the accumulation of tens of thousands of horses by the BLM and the question of what to do with them.

At the same time these small communities of free-living horses and burros are under attack, ranchers graze several million cows and other domesticated animals on public lands. Animal agribusiness is notorious for its heavy use of fuel and water, a driving force behind environmental damage, and a leading generator of greenhouse gases. The blame for the degraded, overgrazed condition of western public lands lies with cattle ranching, not free-roaming horses and burros.

This destructive cycle of roundups, privatization and sterilization must stop. There is ample public land for free-living equids: over 19 million acres are legally designated for their use. Federal plans to spend nearly $100 million in tax dollars to create “preserves” is thus as wasteful as it is disrespectful to these equid communities.

Also as wasteful as it is disrespectful is the proposal to aggressively manage herds remaining on rangeland through sterilization and control of reproduction.

Wild free-roaming horses and burros should be entitled to genuine and full protection of the law. We assert that the only way to truly protect free-living horses on the pockets of lands that constitute their habitat is to empower them to remain free.

The time has come for the BLM to do the job of protecting and respecting wild horses and burros, instead of continuing to compromise this duty for the benefit of animal agribusiness.

Sincerely,

Priscilla Feral
President
Friends of Animals

(1) See Deanne Stillman, “Wild Horses Aren’t Free” - Los Angeles Times (2 Jun. 2008).

(2) Lyndsey Layton and Juliet Eilperin, “Salazar Presents Ambitious Plan to Manage Wild Horses” - Washington Post (8 Oct. 2009).

It is unreasonable to kill deer or other free-living animals for eating the plants that sustain them after we have fragmented their habitat. Great thanks to our members for supporting our work, so that we are able to push back, defending this community of deer and by extension all animals affected by the government’s proposal to control them, as well as the peace and safety of the surrounding community.

Friends of Animals submitted comments to the U.S. National Park Service for the official record on 2 November 2009. Friends of Animals and the specific signatories to this statement strongly support “Alternative A: no action” against the deer in Rock Creek Park.

The “too many of them” claim everywhere paves the way for the domination and control of free-roaming animals – first predators, then the prey. Friends of Animals would like to call upon the community to raise its collective voice against shooting and pharmaceutical control of free-living animals.

Comment for the official record, on the White-Tailed Deer Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (“Plan/EIS”) for Rock Creek Park.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Date: 2 November 2009

From:

Dustin Rhodes (Washington, DC), Capital Correspondent, Friends of Animals
Lee Hall, JD (PA), Legal Director for Friends of Animals

To:

National Park Service
Adrienne A. Coleman, Superintendent

We submit this letter on behalf of Friends of Animals (“FoA”) and its members. FoA is a non-profit, international advocacy organization incorporated in New York in 1957, with its principal place of business in Darien, Connecticut. FoA seeks to free animals from cruelty and exploitation around the world, and to promote a respectful view of free-living and domestic animals. FoA engages in a variety of advocacy programs in support of these goals. FoA has a longstanding interest in advocating for the dignity and interests of deer and other animals in biocommunities that include deer.

Dustin Rhodes also submits these comments this letter as a Washington, D.C. resident and frequent visitor of Rock Creek Park (“Rock Creek”).

Rock Creek is a haven in the heart of Washington, D.C. — a national park nestled in a densely populated urban setting. In the words of the National Park Service (“NPS”), “Rock Creek Park is truly a gem in our nation’s capital. It offers visitors an opportunity to reflect and soothe their spirits through the beauty of nature. Fresh air, majestic trees, wild animals, and the ebb and flow of Rock Creek emanate the delicate aura of the forest.”

This delicate aura, and specifically the wild animals contributing to it, is in danger.

The park’s lands are fragmented; firearms are especially unlikely to be appropriate or safe in such an oddly shaped, highly urban park. Residential and commercial areas of Washington, D.C. and Maryland surround all of the park units. Over 1,100 homes and apartments abut the park units along 72 sprawling miles of the park boundary. The largest of the 99 reservations, Rock Creek Park (Reservation 339), consists of 1,754 acres of Rock Creek and the surrounding valley from the Maryland state line south to the National Zoological Park.

As required by the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), the NPS has recently proposed a deer management plan for Rock Creek. The goal, as presented at a recent public meeting, is to develop a strategy that supports long-term protection, preservation and restoration of native vegetation and other natural and cultural resources. The plan considers four alternatives:

• Alternative A: No action. Under this option, NPS would not shoot the deer or introduce contraceptive substances to the population. This would, however, allow for the strategic use of fencing and green corridors, which, when combined with native, deterrent plants, could respectfully control the deer population.

• Alternative B: Combined “non-lethal” actions. This option calls for the use of fencing and reproductive control.

• Alternative C: Combined lethal actions. This option calls for the use of sharpshooters, and, in the words of the NPS, “capture and euthanasia.” The latter term refers to a systematic slaughter of the deer population.

• Alternative D: Combined lethal and “non-lethal” actions. This option combines the unnatural method of pharmaceutical reproductive control and sharpshooting.

The proposed plan and its consideration of alternatives violate both NEPA and the Organic Act. Under NEPA, the NPS failed to consider an adequate array of alternatives and failed to perform an adequate impact analysis. As for the Organic Act, the NPS failed to comply with Rock Creek’s enabling legislation.

NEPA

NEPA sets forth broad principles and goals for the nation’s environmental policy. 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 – 4370a. It serves as “the continuing policy of the Federal Government to use all practicable means and measures … to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony.” 42 U.S.C. § 4331(a).

Alternative Analysis

In furtherance of that goal, NEPA requires all federal agencies to analyze the environmental impact of a major federal action before proceeding with that action. 42 U.S.C. § 4332(2)©(ii). In this case, one of the primary alternatives considered – reproductive control – is fundamentally unacceptable.

No contraceptive has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use on deer in the United States. Testing of such contraceptives has yielded extremely harmful results. These have included “immunological castration, compromised libido and abnormal antler development.”¹ Abscesses, inflammation, pain, reduced fat content in bone are some of the side effects observed in other studies. Not only have there been documented health effects, but controlling the fertility of free-ranging animals is physically intrusive and can alter the social structure of the entire group.

At the September 2, 2009 park meeting, the Humane Society of the United States and other animal protection groups promoted the use of contraceptives on deer. However, they did not address the potential impact that the introduction of contraceptive substances could have on the environment and the natural food web. In addition, they did not consider how the dramatic reduction in the number of deer could catalyze changes in other wildlife.

Moreover, to use the park’s deer experimentally is contrary to the goals of the Plan/EIS. For example, experimental fertility control has been known to prolong the lifespan of the Assateague Island mares from six to twenty years due to the elimination of the biological stress of reproduction. Thus, working against the logic of reducing numbers, reproductive control is likely to enable a current population of free-roaming animals to live longer.

As birth control is an unviable alternative, the NPS failed to provide a clear basis for choice among the alternatives and effectively limited the viable alternatives to two extremes: fencing and shooting. By including reproductive control as a viable option, the NPS has artificially inflated its range of alternatives.

Impact Analysis

The NPS has also failed to properly analyze the impact of the proposed plan. First, the plan falls short of accounting for the health and safety of park users and area residents. Rock Creek’s urban location, combined with rifle bullets’ capacity to travel three miles, makes the introduction of sharpshooters an unacceptable risk to human safety. Additionally, Rock Creek’s boundaries are fragmented by the surrounding city and its borders are enclosed, as indicated above, by 1,100 homes and apartments. The park’s unique geometry would make it impossible to find a suitable shooting range. One cannot help but wonder how the NPS can view sharpshooting as a safe alternative in an area it describes as “an oasis for urban dwellers … located in the heart of a densely populated cosmopolitan area.” See Plan/EIS at 11.

Second, the plan will have an extremely negative impact on the perception of NPS conservation. Introducing a counterintuitive conservation method (slaughtering deer in an effort to preserve nature) would bewilder those citizens who witness it. Rock Creek, however, is a park unit that will attract not only local residents, but also visitors from around the world. The public perception of NPS conservation would be extremely skewed if visitors based their judgment on this highly visible park’s deer management policy.

Third, sharpshooting would be ineffective at achieving the goals of the NPS. Killing deer will not protect local gardeners’ azaleas from disoriented deer looking for a safe spot to eat. Nor will it stop cars from crashing into deer in icy midwinter. If the park’s plan were to be accepted, frightened deer will inevitably scatter, in attempts to avoid the danger posed by sharpshooters. Additionally, after the deer are slaughtered and removed from the park, the population, following their nature, will rebound with extra fawns in spring. It is unreasonable to kill deer or other wildlife for eating the plants that sustain them – especially after officials have so fragmented their habitat with parking lots, roadways, running, hiking and biking trails.

The Organic Act, Rock Creek’s enabling legislation, and National Park Service management policies

This Plan/EIS is inconsistent with the Organic Act, the Park’s enabling legislation, and NPS management policies. The Organic Act requires the NPS to manage its lands “for one fundamental purpose… to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such a manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.” 16 U.S.C. § 1. The NPS “is to afford the highest standard of protection and care to the natural resources within…the National Park System.” S. Rep. No. 95-528, at 14 (1977). The Organic Act forbids the NPS from allowing any activity that will cause “derogation of the values and the purposes for which [the area has] been established.” 16 U.S.C. § 1a-1.

Shooting free-living white-tailed deer in a national park, such as Rock Creek, does not conform to the fundamental purpose of conserving wildlife within federal parks. Similarly, the impermissible use of hypothetical birth control within the herd is an activity fundamentally out of line with the NPS’s mission to protect and conserve the natural resources of a park. Administering birth control and shooting deer in a National Park is a derogation of the values and the purposes for which Rock Creek has been established and is therefore a clear violation of the Organic Act.

Rock Creek’s enabling legislation, states the Plan/EIS, created “a public park and pleasure ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people of the United States” and further observes that in the park’s establishment, Congress promulgated regulations “providing for the prevention from injury or spoliation of all timber, animals or curiosities within said park, and their retention in their natural condition, as nearly as possible.”

Using firearms and chemically engineered birth control is clearly not preventing animals from “injury or spoliation”; nor is it consistent with Congress’s charge to retain the animals in their “natural condition.”

While the NPS has the authority to manage the wildlife in its parks, the taking, feeding, touching, and harassing of wildlife is prohibited. As to whether hunting, fishing, or trapping is allowed within the park, each national park is guided by its own enabling legislation. If the enabling legislation does not specifically allow for these activities, they are prohibited on NPS lands. The Rock Creek enabling legislation does not specifically allow for hunting, fishing or trapping; thus, it is prohibited within the park. However, hunting and trapping is exactly what the plan proposes.

In January 2009, a study was published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that made headlines worldwide. The study found that this type of management is not only detrimental to the deer slaughtered, but also to the surviving population, for the more highly controlled the environment, the lower the genetic diversity. These changes make no evolutionary sense and ultimately threaten the viability of a species.

Conclusion

The deer population in a given amount of space tends to rise in concentrated green areas (yet, obviously, be lowered on actual sites of construction) due to gardening practices, construction and a lack of respect for or dearth of natural predators such as coyotes. The deer then balance their own numbers (even by absorption of the embryo, if necessary) as they cannot exceed the food and foliage that provides needed shelter and sustenance. To co-exist with animals in a park we should enjoy the presence of its fresh air, majestic trees, and wild animals — and we must also act respectfully. Human factors that can be altered must be given attention, or the calls of “too many deer” and the pressure to shoot at them when they are deemed inconvenient will be cyclical.

Environmental degradation to the park has taken place over many years and is also impacted by previous, deliberate removals of natural vegetation, by vehicle exhaust, construction, and the activity of human residents and other factors. The government’s proposal is not an environmental fix so much as a plan of convenience, demonstrating a poverty of innovation needed to advance ecologically respectful policy. Killing deer is not the answer.

We must work diligently to foster respect for indigenous animals where they survive, and keep the biocommunity in the balance it evolved to maintain. And where we’ve made mistakes, we should resolve not to condone still worse ones. Alternative A, no action against these deer, is the right thing to promote. No shooting and no pharmaceutical control. The “too many of them” claim everywhere paves the way for the domination and control of free-roaming animals – first predators, then the prey. It’s extremely disingenuous to kill and foist lab-created fertility control vaccines on members of the natural community and claim to save that community as a whole.

The NPS’s plan is extreme, short-sighted and severe. It does not reflect the careful reasoning required by NEPA, nor does it further the purpose set out by Congress upon the establishment of Rock Creek. The NPS should reconsider the options available and take a hard look at the real and significant consequences that will result from its proposed and favored action. Friends of Animals and the specific signatories to this statement strongly support “Alternative A: no action” on the deer in Rock Creek Park.

Sincerely,

Dustin Rhodes, Capital Correspondent, Friends of Animals
Contact: dustin[AT]friendsofanimals.org

Lee Hall, JD, Legal Director, Friends of Animals
Contact: leehall[AT]friendsofanimals.org

Friends of Animals National Headquarters: 777 Post Rd, Suite 205, Darien, CT 06820 www.friendsofanimals.org

REFERENCES

Paul D. Curtis et al., “Pathophysiology of White-tailed Deer Vaccinated With Porcine Zona Pellucida Immunocontraceptive” - Vaccine (Vol. 25, 11 April 2007); at pages 4623–4630.

Gary J. Killian and Lowell A. Miller, “Behavioral Observations and Physiological Implications for White-Tailed Deer Treated With Two Different Immunocontraceptives” - USDA: APHIS 2001; available: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/nwrc/publications/01pubs/01-36.pdf.

Chris T. Darimont et al., “ Human Predators Outpace Other Agents of Trait Change in the Wild” - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (12 Jan. 2009). Edited by Gretchen C. Daily, Stanford University; abstract and link to full text available: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/01/12/0809235106.

Cornelia Dean, “Research Ties Human Acts to Harmful Rates of Species Evolution” - New York Times (12 Jan. 2009); available: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/science/13fish.html?_r=1. For related information see Lily Huang, “It’s Survival of the Weak and Scrawny: Researchers see ‘evolution in reverse’ as hunters kill off prized animals with the biggest antlers and pelts” - Newsweek (magazine issue dated 12 Jan. 2009); available: http://www.newsweek.com/id/177709 or in a one-page, printable format at http://www.newsweek.com/id/177709/output/print.

References last visited 2 November 2009.

LOS ANGELES — The Obama administration’s first try at resolving the debate over the wild horses of the West has not gone over well with some.

Animal rights groups say that Interior Secretary Ken Salazar’s proposal to relocate thousands of mustangs to preserves in the East and Midwest would compound years of federal mismanagement of the horses.

They want the 37,000 horses now roaming federal lands in the West to remain despite the risk of starvation and conflicts with cattle. In response to Salazar’s proposal, they reiterated their stand during the Bush administration: let the mustangs run loose on millions of acres of federal land where beef cattle are raised.

read full article>

Hunting changes the way deer naturally evolve and can cause deer populations to increase. Nature itself ensures that the deer population is limited by available food, territory, and winter weather conditions, which restrict
both food and range. The reproductive rate and the survival rate of deer will then decrease, creating a natural balance. Deer simply need us to let them be, and that’s the message that needs to be communicated to your
legislators.

Hunting is also known to increase the instances of accidents, with people driving into scattering deer. A 2002 study by Friends of Animals indicated that hunting exacerbates roadway deaths of deer. About half of all these
accidents happen during the three months of hunting season: October, November and December.

We ask Westchester and Rockland County residents: Please contact the officials below and tell them that you demand an end to the plan to turn your peaceful parklands into places where arrows fly.

Westchester County Executive Andrew J. Spano
148 Martine Avenue
White Plains, NY 10601
Phone: 914.995.2900
Fax: 914.995.2939
Email

Joseph A. Stout, Commissioner Dept. of Parks, Recreation & Conservation
25 Moore Avenue
Mt. Kisco, New York 10549
Phone: 914.864.7000
Fax: 914.864.7053
Email

Rockland County Residents

Rockland County Legislator Gerold Beirker wants to follow Westchester’s bloody lead, and has introduced bowhunting legislation that would allow bowhunting of deer on county parkland.

We ask Rockland County residents to contact Legislator Gerold M. Bierker and tell him that your parklands are not appropriate places for bowhunters, and that deer don’t need to be managed unnaturally.

Gerold M. Bierker Rockland County Legislature
11 New Hempstead Rd.
New City, NY 10956
Phone: 845.638.5753
Email

New York— Westchester County’s intention to turn 850 acres of parkland over to bow-and-arrow violence on November 7th should not prevail. With Rockland County taking steps to follow this lead, Friends of Animals president Priscilla Feral stated, “Deer are not causing real problems to the people of New York, but violence is.”

Bowhunters were given the green light in Westchester to invade Muscoot Farm Park and Lasdon Park, where hunting was formerly prohibited, by a “task force” comprised of pro-hunting organizations and agencies, including the president of the Westchester Bow Hunter’s Association, which concluded that deer are “overpopulated” and to blame for forest damage.

Feral explains, “Hunting has been on the decline for many years, so each year, hunters and the agencies which license hunting in exchange for a revenue flow scramble to excuse their killing to the public, and usually their claims involve benefits to the humans at the expense of other free-living animals’ lives.”

Hunting changes the way deer naturally evolve and can cause deer populations to increase. Nature itself ensures that the deer population is limited by available food, territory, and winter weather conditions, which restrict both food and range. Both the reproductive rate and the survival rate of deer will then decrease to suit the environment, creating a natural balance.

Rockland County legislators have now seized upon Westchester’s destructive precedent by planning to form a bogus task force of their own with the hopes of turning Rockland County parkland into deer-killing fields. Rockland County Legislator Gerold Bierker introduced the bowhunting legislation that aims to “offer hunters a local opportunity to enjoy their sport, as well as control the burgeoning deer population.”

Friends of Animals’ members and supporters in New York and internationally condemn hunting for what it is: an egregious assault on nature, on ecosystems and free-living animals by the very species whose population truly is out of control. Too often, we fail to acknowledge how our reckless property development directly impacts the situation of deer and other free-living animals. Maiming and killing animals is not the answer; nor should it be considered sport.

“FoA calls on the Westchester and Rockland County communities to demand an end to the slaughter of deer in their parklands before it happens,” says Priscilla Feral.

A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. - Albert Einstein.

by Anai Rhoads

AnaiRhoads.org — Friends of Animals mourns the passing of a dear friend, Dr. Gordon Haber. Gordon was a co-worker in the cause of fairness in this world, but entirely unlike your typical activist. Without an interest in furthering his own name, Gordon inspired others to join in the cause to save the most misunderstood and wrongfully feared animals in all the world - the wolves. Gordon’s passing should not be the end to a lifetime of work devoted to the wolves he respected and loved so dearly, as he left behind an encyclopedia of knowledge - research that will benefit those who will now follow in his footsteps.

For decades, Gordon advocated for wolves who wandered outside of the Denali Park National Park and Preserve’s boundaries, where they constantly ran the risk of being hunted or trapped. In his early 20’s, he began studying wolves as a temporary park service employee. It was 1966.

Gordon Haber quickly became a prominent figure, battling it out with other biologists in the National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game - and overcoming a multitude of obstacles to protect his revered Toklat wolf pack.

The two began their flight at noon and were expected to return by nightfall. By midnight, there was no word of the team, and the park service was notified that the plane was overdue.

The plane was eventually spotted among trees on a mountainside near the east fork of the Toklat River, approximately seven miles downstream from the park road. The 67 year-old biologist’s remains were discovered by the National Park Service in the burned wreckage of a Cessna 185, located on a steep slope.

The badly burned McGregor managed to survive the crash and was discovered by two backpackers after he had spent hours walking some 20 miles. He confirmed the body in the wreckage was that of Gordon Haber.

Dr. Gordon Haber began working with Friends of Animals in 1993 as an independent contractor. He conducted aerial surveys of wolves, studied their relationships to each other and to other animals, and developed scientific arguments to help with legal challenges. A number of these arguments blew holes in the reports fashioned for the state of Alaska.

His on-the-ground observations were conducted during the summer months inside Denali. During the fall, winter and spring, Friends of Animals supported the flights around the entirety of the wolf control areas, allowing the monitoring of wolf families, and producing reports on targeted and missing wolves.

Priscilla Feral, president of FoA, fondly remembered her good friend and colleague’s “child-like wonder and never-ending awe when watching and hearing about the wolves he cherished,” and recalled: “He took me inside Denali many summers. I watched wolves run, chase prey, play with others, and go about their business of living. I jogged down the road inside Denali — yards away from a female wolf from the Toklat family who was searching for ground squirrels. It’s a favorite memory; one I’ll always treasure. Gordon’s heart and mind were exquisite.”

Priscilla Feral and Gordon Haber met at a wolf summit former Alaska governor Walter Hickel had arranged, to which FoA was invited after Hickel called off the state-sponsored wolf control program. Friends of Animals had called for a tourism boycott in the fall of 1992. It had such an impact on bookings for summer travel to Alaska that Hickel cancelled the killing scheme.

Priscilla Feral continued reflecting.

“Cantankerous on a personal level, so he didn’t make a habit of cultivating friends, as all his energies were devoted to wolves. But he had the brilliance and moxie to stand up to wolf -haters in all forms. Bureaucrats, other scientists. He put wolves first, exposing the wrongs in public policies, and the state’s biologists who create them with their result-oriented science. Gordon expected me to talk about the ethics, so that’s how we defined our roles. He was an expert at challenging the state’s data on moose, caribou and wolves. Gordon would shine a light on the lies that installed the obscene killing plans.”

The wolves were heard howling when the small aircraft was found. Do they mourn their greatest advocate, as we do?

A memorial is planned for November 7. Donations in Gordon Haber’s memory may be sent to:

Friends of Animals
777 Post Road
Darien, CT 06820

You may also make a donation online at http://www.friendsofanimals.org.

By RICHARD MAUER

Published: 10/16/09

As wildlife advocates mourned the plane-crash death of Gordon Haber, the biologist who spent 40 years documenting the lives and societies of Denali’s wolves, his pilot was recovering Friday in a burn center in Seattle after hiking 20 miles back to civilization.

Details of the crash and rescue operation in the heart of Denali National Park emerged Friday, two days after the Cessna 185 used by Haber crashed in spruce trees near the East Fork of the Toklat River, the locale of one of the wolf packs Haber was studying.

The pilot, Daniel McGregor, 35, told a park ranger that he was able to free himself from the wreckage, according to Clint Johnson, senior investigator with the National Transportation Safety Board.

You can read the full story online>

National Parks Traveler

Tragedy-Gordon Haber Killed In Plane Crash in Denali National Park

Posted October 16th, 2009 by Kurt Repanshek

A noted Alaskan wolf biologist has been killed in a plane crash in a remote area of Denali National Park and Preserve. The pilot, though he suffered burns, was able to walk out and alert authorities.

Dr. Gordon Haber and pilot Dan McGregor had left Wednesday for a flight over the northern end of the park to monitor wolf packs. When the Cessna 185 didn’t return on schedule that evening, authorities were notified and an aerial search was mounted by the National Park Service and Alaska State Troopers.

read full article>

UPDATE

Pilot survived crash that killed wolf biologist, Gordon Haber, Ph.D

By MARY PEMBERTON
The Associated Press

Montana will not reconsider changes in this year’s wolf hunt.

Montana: Changes in Wolf Hunt Are Considered

The New York Times

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Wildlife officials will consider changes to the state’s inaugural wolf hunt after hunters killed nine wolves in just three weeks along the border of Yellowstone National Park. More than 1,300 gray wolves were removed from the endangered species list in Idaho and Montana this spring after a costly federal restoration effort. Hunting has been promoted as a way to keep the population of the fast-breeding species in check and reduce wolf attacks on livestock. At least 48 wolves have been killed since Sept. 1 by hunters in the two states. But all but 2 of the 11 killed in Montana came from a small part of the Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness, along the northern border of Yellowstone. Four of those wolves were from Yellowstone’s Cottonwood Pack, including the group’s breeding female. Concerned about the heavily concentrated killing, state wildlife commissioners suspended hunting last week in the area.

By KORKY VANN

“We’re trying to overcome the crunchy-granola reputation,” says Priscilla Feral, national president of Friends of Animals in Darien and author of “The Best of Vegan Cooking” (Friends of Animals Nectar Bat Press, $19.95). “Our image needs to be polished. People think that a vegan diet is a sacrifice, that it’s tasteless and unappealing. It’s not. They think you can’t get enough protein, calcium or iron. You can.”

Feral, a former chocolate recipe designer for Godiva, explores the diversity of “plant-based cuisine” and includes recipes by New York food columnist Mark Bittman, restaurateur Susan Wu and other high-profile chefs in her collection.

The book’s intro includes a brief explanation of [Vegan Society founder Donald] Watson’s philosophy of living in harmony with the planet, but the overriding message is one of healthful eating and fresh, well-prepared dishes.

read full article>

The deer of Valley Forge have reduced their numbers on their own accord over the past five years. Even where deer are numerous, it’s an odd argument that insists humans need to be predators while all along we’re treating the real predators as nuisance animals. Predators are vital to sustaining an ecological environment. For example, the war on the coyotes in Pennsylvania, where they can be hunted down all year, has shifted the natural order. In addition to bringing in the weapons, the National Park Service seeks to implement a contraception program, which may lead to the collapse of what’s left of the park’s White-tailed deer population.

read full article>

Darien,CT—“Each year, apologists for hunting are pressed to justify their violent, unethical deer-killing schemes bolstered by state wildlife agencies which profit from hunting,” says Friends of Animal’s president, Priscilla Feral.

In a press release issued by the pro-hunting group Fairfield County Municipal Deer Management Alliance, traffic accidents, Lyme disease and environmental destruction are solely blamed on deer. The group even called for Fairfield County residents to sanction deer killings on their private property, to “do their part” to eradicate deer. As though deer must disappear to ensure public safety.

Hunting is on the decline, and has been for years; fewer than 1% of Connecticut’s residents hunt.

It’s no longer acceptable to call hunting recreation. Hunters invent social benefits to excuse their killings: “protecting” deer from “over-population” or people from disease, or feeding the hungry. They are “protecting” wildflowers from “over-browsing” and heading off collisions.

Feral observes that humans—the only species on earth whose population is truly out of control—often fail to acknowledge how our reckless overdevelopment and penchant to overpopulate directly impacts our perceived problems with deer and other free-living animals.

Hunting changes the way deer naturally evolve and can cause deer populations to increase. Nature itself ensures that the deer population is limited by available food, territory, and winter weather conditions, which restrict both food and range. Numerous studies over the years have shown that both the reproductive rate and the survival rate of deer will then decrease—creating a natural balance.

Neither do deer cause Lyme disease; black-legged ticks carry the disease when immature, on smaller host animals than deer. Vigilant checks for ticks on the body and immediate removal, especially in the summer and early autumn weeks, are key for controlling the spread of Lyme disease.

It’s true: there are about a 1.5 million reported instances of drivers hitting deer in the United States every year. “So, clearly there is a problem, yet the quickest way to reduce deer/auto collisions is to get the hunters out of the woods,” Feral says. A 2002 study by Friends of Animals found that hunting actually exacerbates roadway deaths of deer because it can frighten deer into darting out to roadways. About half of all these collisions occur in just three months: October, November, and December — hunting season.

Howard Kilpatrick, a biologist with the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in Connecticut, celebrates the fact that more land has been opened up to hunting—telling the Stamford Advocate “that’s what we need to manage deer populations.” But what Kilpatrick doesn’t mention is his own professional bias: The DEP is a pro-hunting agency that is funded, in part, by the sale of hunting licenses and a federal excise tax on guns and ammunition. This fact alone ensures only one thing: corrupt, one-sided “science.”

Nature is being managed to death; it’s time for communities to call for ceasefires. Deer simply need us to let them be.

Maryanne Appel of CARE and Matt McLaughlin of FoA-Pennsylvania at Friends of Animals’ Third Vigil for the Deer of Valley Forge.

Friends of Animals’ Third Vigil for the Valley Forge Deer took place on an overcast Saturday just west of Philadelphia. A group of concerned local people educated Valley Forge National Historical Park visitors that the National Park Service wants to control the deer with sharpshooters and pharmaceuticals beginning this winter.

The government has decided that if there were only a few less deer — say, 80% less — there’d be no need to worry about the newly planted saplings, no complaints from nearby homeowners that deer come over and eat their ornamental plants, and so forth. Federal park officials recently issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement that proposes to shoot 80% and pharmaceutically control the survivors.

But the deer population in the park has decreased over the last five years, not increased.

The Park itself has many non-native plants and plenty of artificial structures. To blame the deer for offending the forest regeneration work is disingenuous.

And while the government tries to scare us all about Chronic Wasting Disease, there is no such disease in the deer of Pennsylvania. Indeed, the blatantly wrong thing to do would be to decrease the deer population artificially, thereby leaving a vacuum for other deer to fill.

Friends of Animals, together with the locally based group CARE, are filing a suit to head off the federal government’s violent and intrusive plans.

Rock Creek Park in Washington, DC, is proposing a similar action against the deer there. Friends of Animals’ DC office will submit detailed public comments opposing the plan.

Even where animal populations are increasing, this is due to our own encroachment (pressing free-living animals into ever smaller spaces) and the removal of predators by allowing people to hunt or trap them. The Pennsylvania Game Commission currently treats coyotes as vermin. Yet they are capable predators when hunting in pairs or groups.

We are pressing for respect for animals to balance themselves – which they do, despite our constant pressure and interference.

Hands off the Valley Forge Deer!

Special thanks to Maryanne Appel, Steve Appel, Deanna Calderaio, Christine Carney, Wilson Geiger and Allison Memmo Geiger, Greg Lafontaine, Gregg Lammey, Matt McLaughlin, and Char Padworny.

If you are looking for a beautiful vegan cookbook that offers a variety of elegant dishes, look no further than The Best of Vegan Cooking by Priscilla Feral. You might overlook this one when you decide on your next cookbook purchase, which would be a shame. This beautifully illustrated and easy to follow cookbook just might change your next vegan gathering from good to gourmet. The presentation of some of the dishes is so gorgeous that it may seem daunting, but is easy to duplicate if you follow the recipes. Before you realize it, you are amazing your friends, be they omnivore or vegan.

read full article >