Search Our Site

Search form

social

State Ordered to Pay Friends of Animals' Fees

January 24, 2007 | Wolves / Alaska Boycott

Fairbanks Daily News-Miner

By Tim Mowry

The state must pay $95,000 in attorney fees to Friends of Animals for a lawsuit the Connecticut-based animal-rights group won last year that temporarily halted Alaska's controversial predator control program, according to a decision by an Anchorage Superior Court judge last week.

Superior Court judge Sharon Gleason ruled Friday that the state is responsible for attorney fees incurred by Friends of Animals for a lawsuit the group filed in November 2003 that was decided last January.

The decision was confirmed by state officials and representatives for Friends of Animals.

"It's very good news," said FOA executive director Priscilla Feral by phone from Connecticut.

read full article at the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner

Comments

How on God's green earth are Alaskans stuck with your lawyer bill? Your lawsuit ultimately failed and now we get to pay $95,000 to you? Unfortunately Judge Gleason is not up for retention vote until 2010. Guess you have three years to fund your lawsuits from Alaskans. FoA comments: Perhaps because there is a God, but certainly because justice prevailed.

Congratulations!! This is wonderful news. Julie

I am glad that Friends of Animals will get their $95,000. attorney fees paid. FOA is doing the right thing for animals, and I support them 100%. Keep up the good work.

While there is sweet justice in FOA receiving a payback for their cost and time in court, the barbarism towards wolf populations in Alaska continues. Until the hunting of wolves is rescinded it is difficult to feel any sense of accomplishment and satisfaction in this situation. [Blog editors' note: The work goes on and may it continue to be costly for the state of Alaska to gerrymander to justify wolf-control schemes.]

I am so happy that the state has to pay. This is very wonderful news!

Another win for God's creatures. Congratulations!

Can't you people supposedly for animals rights just leave Alaska alone? They did nothing to you but they did what was needed to be done. What about the Indians? Are you going to tell them they can't kill animals for survival? All the people in Africa kill to survive. Are you going to say, hey we love animals, don't kill them? I don't think so. Leave Alaska alone. If you don't want to be there, then don't go. I know more then enough people who would LOVE to go to Alaska that they would make up for you. Alaska gets so many people and you aren't going to stop tourism because of your boycott alaska campaign. Just leave the state alone and let them do what the feel is right for the survival of other animals, because it seems that you people just don't care. You say you care about animals, well what about all the caribou that are dying because there are too many wolves? You don't care about them if you want the wolves to survive. It isn't a win/win situation here. You need to be smarter than the average bear and understand what is being done in Alaska is for the good of everyone and animal! [Blog editors' note: Thanks for the morning laughter. We haven't had a rant from one of Alaska's hunters telling everyone to mind their own business for months. Cheers. ]

I would rather die then to hurt an animal....

YES!!! Finally, some teeth into the animal rights. Perhaps, just perhaps, they will listen, instead of forcing the hands of any animals rights group to sue. Compromise, listening, and respect goes a long way. Thank you, thank you Friends of Animals!!!

Friends of Animals, I thank you for your boycott of Alaska. As a 4th generation Alaskan we are sick of you coming to our state anyway. If you want to start a state wide park, start in the lower 48. We real Alaskans don't want you here!

Pages

Add new comment