Mary Cummins Animal Advocates Los Angeles California Wildlife Rehabilitation Real Estate

Mary Cummins Animal Advocates Los Angeles California Wildlife Rehabilitation Real Estate
WEBSITE       FACEBOOK       YOUTUBE        MARY CUMMINS RESUME

Thursday, March 23, 2017

Deadly Fungus Invades Texas and is Found on a New Bat Species - BCI - Mary Cummins, Animal Advocates

BCI, Bat Conservation International, WNS, White Nose Syndrome,  Pseudogymnoascus destructans, Animal Advocates, Mary Cummins, Los Angeles, California
Deadly Fungus Invades Texas and is Found on a New Bat Species
The fungus known to cause White-nose Syndrome (WNS), a disease that has decimated hibernating bat populations in the United States and Canada, has been discovered for the first time in Texas.
The fungus Pseudogymnoascus destructans (Pd) was detected on three species of hibernating bats in northern Texas: the cave myotis (pictured), Townsend’s big-eared bat, and the tri-colored bat. This is the first discovery of Pd on the cave myotis and the first detection of the fungus on western populations of Townsend's big-eared bats - two bat species with distributions extending further into the west.
"This is devastating news for Texas, and a serious blow for our western bat species," says Mike Daulton, Executive Director for Bat Conservation International (BCI).
Katie Gillies, Director of Imperiled Species for BCI added, "We have been surveying hibernating bats and monitoring for the arrival of Pd for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) since 2011. At this early stage of detection, we have not observed any visible signs of the disease on any bats in the state, such as white fungal growth on the nose and wings. Detecting the fungus when it first arrives gives us a chance to take action and try to minimize the impacts from White-nose Syndrome on our Texas bats."
The fungus was detected in six Texas counties from samples collected in January and February by BCI and Texas A&M University (TAMU) biologists as part of a larger national surveillance study led by University of California, Santa Cruz. The cave and bat samples were collected in Childress, Collingsworth, Cottle, Hardeman, King, and Scurry counties.
"The arrival of the fungus in Texas is not surprising. I’ve been looking for it for years, hoping I would never find it. And now that it’s here, I’m devastated because I know what WNS does to bats. After years of surveys, I feel a special responsibility to these bats. I know them – I see them every winter. And now, I fear that I might not see them for much longer. We must act now," explains Gillies.
"We need to expand our targeted surveillance to get a better understanding of the distribution of the fungus. We will also be reaching out to landowners and the community to help protect bat roosts and emphasize decontamination to reduce the likelihood of an accidental spread of the fungus to a new location."
White-nose Syndrome has been rapidly expanding westward since its discovery in New York in 2007. Millions of bats have been killed by the disease, with population declines greater than 90% in some states. 
Texas, with 32 bat species, has the greatest diversity of bat fauna in the country. The state is also home to the famous roosts of Mexican free-tailed bats at the Ann. W. Richards Congress Ave Bridge in Austin and Bracken Cave, one of the largest bat colonies in the world, near San Antonio. However, Mexican free-tailed bats do not hibernate all winter and may not be highly susceptible to the disease.
"While we are cautiously optimistic that Mexican free-tailed bats will not be heavily impacted by the disease, we do have serious concerns for hibernating species, such as the cave myotis, that often share their roosts," says Winifred Frick, BCI Senior Director of Conservation Science. 
Texas is the most eastern edge of the distribution for the cave myotis, with the species being found throughout southwestern USA and into Mexico. The discovery of the fungus in Texas is significant on a national scale as biologists are concerned that the spread of Pd into western states will be exacerbated as this and other western species are exposed.
"The detection of Pd in Texas comes on the heels of last week’s announcement of White-nose Syndrome being confirmed in Nebraska. This emphasizes the need for us to not only increase our surveillance but also our research efforts to identify and develop tools to improve survival for bats exposed to the fungus. Although there is no known treatment for White-nose Syndrome, we are actively working on research that may prove effective," Frick explained.

Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates is a wildlife rehabilitator licensed by the California Department of Fish and Game and the USDA. Mary Cummins is also a licensed real estate appraiser in Los Angeles, California.


Google+ Mary Cummins, Mary K. Cummins, Mary Katherine Cummins, Mary Cummins-Cobb, Mary, Cummins, Cobb, wildlife, wild, animal, rescue, wildlife rehabilitation, wildlife rehabilitator, fish, game, los angeles, california, united states, squirrel, raccoon, fox, skunk, opossum, coyote, bobcat, manual, instructor, speaker, humane, nuisance, control, pest, trap, exclude, deter, green, non-profit, nonprofit, non, profit, ill, injured, orphaned, exhibit, exhibitor, usda, united states department of agriculture, hsus, humane society, peta, ndart, humane academy, humane officer, animal legal defense fund, animal cruelty, investigation, peace officer, animal, cruelty, abuse, neglect #marycummins #animaladvocates #losangeles #california #wildlife #wildliferehabilitation #wildliferehabilitator #realestate #realestateappraiser #realestateappraisal #lawsuit

Monday, February 13, 2017

Lawsuit behind the USDA deleting inspection and permit reports - Contender Farms, Show inc, Lee McGartland, horse soring

USDA, HSUS, Contender Farms, Lee McGartland, Mike McGartland, Show Inc, united states department of agriculture

UPDATE: I just found the documents which the McGartlands wanted removed from the USDA website. They publicly filed them in their public lawsuit against the USDA. Therefore the documents are privileged and can be publicly shared. The documents attached to their February 2016 lawsuit against the USDA include Tab, Exhibit 8 which are official warning letters and form 7060. They involve four horses who showed evidence of soring at two events on three different days. The documents in order are as follows,

August 23, 2012 form 7060 violations of federal law, unlawful acts, case TN130373-AC, violator Mike McGartland, 15 U.S.C. Sec 1824(7) showing of horse with substance used to sore a horse, ( C.F.R. Sec 11.2(c) prohibited substance, horse tested positive for sulfur, horse "Low on Gin," 74th Annual Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration in Shelbyville, TN.

Same violation against Lee McGartland.

Same violation against Chris Alexander.

August 30, 2012 form 7060, case TN130155-AC, against Mike McGartland, 15 U.S.C. Sec 124(2), horse is sore. 9 C.F.R. Sec 11.3 scar rule, horse is sore, horse "He's Shady in Black," in the 74th Annual Tennessee Walking Horse Naional Celebration in Shelbyville, TN.

Same violation against Lee McGartland.

Same violation against Chris Alexander.

February 17, 2016 official warning letter from the USDA, case TN150128-AC. Letter states USDA could impose civil penalties up to $2,200 or other sanctions for each violation. USDA decided not to pursue penalties as long as they don't violate the regulations again. They offered them the opportunity for a hearing.

August 26, 2014, Lee McGartland, TN150128-AC, 15 U.S.C. sec 1824(2)(A), horse is sore, horse "She's A Shady Sister" (class no. 120, entry no. 1001) at the 76th Annual Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration in Shelbyville, Tennessee.

Same warning letter as February 17, 2016 but to Michael McGartland.

Same for 7060 as above August 26, 2014 but to Michael McGartland, case TN150127-AC. This time the horse is "Blue's Master" (class no. 139B, entry no. 982), same show.

Below is the link to the documents.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxE8KfVPjYF4dUhGeFJwRFp3YjQ/view?usp=sharing

It's really shocking that the McGartlands would demand that the USDA remove all inspection, permit, violation reports because of a few warning forms and letters. In their lawsuit they said they were denied a hearing. In the letter the USDA offered them a hearing if they wanted to contest the warnings. The USDA could have cited them, fined them but they didn't.

From personal experience I can tell you that USDA is not very strict on enforcing regulations. You have to do something really bad to even get a warning. Even after warning letters they don't start any action unless the person refuses to correct their behavior and defies the USDA like the Wildlife Waystation and Tiger Rescue did numerous times. I personally feel that the Texas attorneys who owned the horse just wanted to bully the USDA into silence. They almost succeeded. Hopefully the USDA will be able to stop them. We need those records to be public for this reason.

February 3, 2017 USDA removed permit and inspection reports along with the search engine stating it was in part due to litigation. February 7, 2017 they updated their reason, see below.

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalwelfare/enforcementactions

"Last Modified: Feb 3, 2017  Print
Courts are continuously issuing decisions that provide agencies with guidance on interpreting and applying laws applicable to the release of information to the public by the Federal government, including the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act. In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice maintains comprehensive guidance involving the Privacy Act, Freedom of Information Act, and other laws, and updates such guidance based on legal developments. APHIS, with the support from the Office of the General Counsel, continuously monitors these sources of information and makes refinements to APHIS’ practices, as needed.

Based on our commitment to being transparent, remaining responsive to our stakeholders’ informational needs, and maintaining the privacy rights of individuals, APHIS is implementing actions to remove documents it posts on APHIS’ website involving the Horse Protection Act (HPA) and the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) that contain personal information. These documents include inspection reports, research facility annual reports, regulatory correspondence (such as official warnings), lists of regulated entities, and enforcement records (such as pre-litigation settlement agreements and administrative complaints) that have not received final adjudication. In addition, APHIS will review and redact, as necessary, the lists of licensees and registrants under the AWA, as well as lists of designated qualified persons (DQPs) licensed by USDA-certified horse industry organizations to ensure personal information is not released to the general public.

Those seeking information from APHIS regarding inspection reports, research facility annual reports, regulatory correspondence, and enforcement records should submit Freedom of Information Act requests for that information. Records will be released when authorized and in a manner consistent with the FOIA and Privacy Act. If the same records are frequently requested via the Freedom of Information Act process, APHIS may post the appropriately redacted versions to its website. In addition, some enforcement records (such as initial decision and orders, default decisions, and consent decisions) are available on the USDA’s Office of Administrative Law Judge’s website (https://www.oaljdecisions.dm.usda.gov). For more information on preparing and submitting Freedom of Information Act requests, please visit https://efoia-pal.usda.gov/palMain.aspx."

USDA stated they removed the documents because of litigation. I went and found a couple of the cases related to the take down of this public information. One of the cases is CONTENDER FARMS, LLP, LEE MCGARTLAND, MIKE MCGARTLAND and SHOW, INC., Plaintiffs vs.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Case No. 4:16-cv-163-Y, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, FORT WORTH DIVISION.

This is the second lawsuit the McGartlands who are both lawyers, attorneys filed against the USDA over their alleged violations and public reports. From the Washington Post,

Lee Wall McGartland, Michael "Mike" McGartland, Texas, lawyers, personal injury, tennessee walking horses, usda, lawsuit


"Three summers ago, Lee Wall McGartland and Mike McGartland entered a horse named The Royal Dollar in the 74th annual Red Carpet Show of the South. A veterinary medical officer from the U.S. Department of Agriculture was there, too.

The animal placed third in its class in the competition for Tennessee walking horses, which have a high-stepping gait that enthusiasts say comes from breeding and training. But it can also come from the application of caustic chemicals to a horse’s legs and other painful practices called “soring.” These are outlawed under the federal Horse Protection Act, and the Agriculture department is responsible for horse owners’ compliance. During a post-show inspection, the veterinary officer determined that The Royal Dollar was sore.

The finding resulted in one of several official warnings between 2013 and 2016 that identified the McGartlands as “violators” — warnings that appeared on a public USDA database and that now underpin a legal battle between the Texas couple and the department. The McGartlands sued, arguing that the enforcement program denies due process to those accused of violations and breaks privacy laws by publishing personal information."

In this case the USDA noted that the Plaintiffs violated the Horse Protection Act. USDA posted in the USDA website their inspection reports, inventory of animals, warning letters and other related USDA documents.

Plaintiffs sued the USDA stating that posting that information is a violation of Plaintiff's privacy. Plaintiffs also state that they feel the reports are false and defamatory. Plaintiffs state they were never allowed a hearing before a court of law before the violations were listed on the USDA website even though they did receive warning letters. From the second amended complaint which is linked below,

"Plaintiffs in this case allege that both USDA’s use of warnings and publication of the Form 7060s and other enforcement-related information are unlawful and not authorized by the HPA. (ECF No. 45, Second Am. Compl. ¶¶ 44-51, 58, 64)."

Previously USDA said there could be no settlement of this lawsuit. Now all of a sudden after the documents were purged Plaintiffs said there could be a settlement. HSUS then intervened because they need online access to the documents because they cannot be timely obtained through FOIA requests. Below is the motion and memorandum in support. If you look at the linked USDA documents in the memorandum, they're now missing. You get a 403 page.

Second Amended Complaint by Plaintiffs.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxE8KfVPjYF4V3dVY2dxUi1icVU/view?usp=sharing

HSUS Motion to Intervene.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxE8KfVPjYF4bkZHMWdsQVdHd3M/view?usp=sharing

HSUS memorandum in support of motion to intervene.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxE8KfVPjYF4c21IdWxzcUNFbXc/view?usp=sharing

Here is the docket.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxE8KfVPjYF4NmtqQ1dzdHFHTFE/view?usp=sharing

Plaintiffs argue that having the documents online is a violation of the Privacy Act §552a(b).

"The legal wrong about which the McGartlands and Contender Farms complain results from
USDA employees unlawfully deciding the McGartlands violated the HPA and imposing sanctions
on them by assessing penalties that are then published on USDA databases. 5 U.S.C. §551(10)(C)
and (13). SHOW complains that the USDA has wrongfully publicized on these same databases
that SHOW has violated the HPA."

The McGartlands also complain that the USDA has violated their privacy rights by
disclosing and publishing false and misleading personal information about them on USDA
databases in violation of the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. §552a(b).

"D. The USDA Unlawfully Disclosed the McGartlands’ Personal Information
Without Their Consent in Violation of Privacy Act §552a(b).
69. On June 8, 2015, the McGartlands saw on the USDA’s website that they were identified as
having violated the HPA on August 23 and 30, 2012. The USDA was immediately contacted and
informed of the McGartlands’ concern that it had been publically disclosed that they had violated
the Act, pointing out that the HPA does not authorize the Agency to release allegations about those
it investigated or believed had violated the Act. The USDA was requested to remove the website
and inform the world that it was a mistake to have said the McGartlands violated the Act.
70. On June 12, 2015, the McGartlands wrote the USDA complaining of the lists the Agency
was publishing that identified them as having violated the Act, pointing out that the USDA was
violating HPA §1825(b) and the Privacy Act. The McGartlands requested the Agency stop making
disclosures about them. The disclosures about the McGartlands on the Searchable Violations List
and Enforcement Actions List were materially false and misleading."

Plaintiffs further argue that the documents should not be released in a FOIA request.

"76. The Privacy Act and FOIA Exemption 7(C) protect from disclosure information compiled
for law enforcement purposes where release “could reasonably be expected to constitute an
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” 5 U.S.C. §552(b)(7)(C). There can be little question
that Agency disclosures, that the McGartlands have been targets of USDA law-enforcement
investigations and enforcement actions, can, and have subjected them to embarrassment and
potentially more serious reputational harm."

They request their information be removed.

"118. Plaintiffs seek a declaration holding unlawful and setting aside Defendant’s alternative
enforcement programs to Formal Enforcement Proceedings, under which the USDA decides that
people have violated the HPA, penalizes them for the violation and falsely and misleadingly
publishes their names on database list as having been determined to have violated the Act.

119. Plaintiffs seek an order enjoining the USDA from publishing the Searchable Violations
List, Enforcement Actions List and HIO Penalty Lists, which falsely or misleadingly identify
people as having been determined to have violated the HPA.

120. Under the APA, HPA and Privacy Act, the McGartlands request this Court declare that the
USDA has violated and is violating the Privacy Act by disclosing the McGartlands’ personal
information in violation of 5 U.S.C. §552a(b). The McGartlands request that the Court enjoin such
violations from occurring in the future, and order that all USDA lists identifying the McGartlands
as having been the subjects of investigations into HPA violations or identifying them as having
been penalized with a public reprimand or Form 7060 be removed from the USDA’s website."

Below is HSUS answer to Plaintiff's complaint. They state Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim and lack standing. I believe if Plaintiffs feel they were defamed, they should have sued for defamation. As the reports are now outside of the statute of limitations of one year for defamation in Texas, they cannot bring a suit for defamation.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxE8KfVPjYF4WExpMGZFZE1kZU0/view?usp=sharing

Plaintiff previously sued USDA for similar things. They lost in district court under fair Judge Terry means, appealed, it was affirmed in part and reversed in part. Below is the docket of the previous case.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxE8KfVPjYF4TTA2aDVSSjJsZ2c/view?usp=sharing

Opinion on the appeal.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxE8KfVPjYF4MUNpMmpCeUtZZkk/view?usp=sharing

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cpub%5C13/13-11052-CV0.pdf

Legal summary about the case.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2015/02/23/5th-circuit-nixes-usda-horse-protection-rule.htm

In summary it appears that Lee and Mike McGartland of Show Inc and Contender Farms show their Tennessee walking horses. They were upset that USDA passed a regulation in 2012 making it mandatory for horse shows to suspend horses which show evidence of soring per USDA inspectors. One of their horses place third then was suspended when a USDA inspector found evidence of soring. The McGartlands sued. They lost in district court, appealed. It was affirmed in part and reversed in part. The McGartlands sued on a technicality stating that the law states there should be a horse inspection but never stated it should be by a USDA inspector.

The McGartlands sued the second time to remove their inspection reports, violation reports and warning letters from the USDA website claiming privacy violations. They also sued because they feel they were noted as having violations without being given a chance to have their case heard before a judge. My opinion is that they could have appealed the USDA's violation report. I did that with the California Dept of Fish & Game. I didn't have a violation report. I appealed an administrative issue and won. The owners of the horse and Plaintiffs in the lawsuit are both personal injury attorneys.

As I see it the Gartlands were found to have sored horses by the USDA. The received violations and their inspection reports were posted online. They felt this hurt their reputation and business. They sued to have evidence of their horse soring removed from the public websites. Sounds to me like someone who committed cruel acts on an animal and they just don't want everyone to know it. These lawsuits bring even more attention to the alleged cruel acts.

Previous article on this USDA issue.

http://animaladvocatesmarycummins.blogspot.com/2017/02/animal-advocates-starts-usdachallenge.html

Here is another one of the lawsuits behind the USDA document dump.

http://marycumminsrealestatemarycummins.blogspot.com/2017/02/usda-removed-documents-because-of-party.html

Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates is a wildlife rehabilitator licensed by the California Department of Fish and Game and the USDA. Mary Cummins is also a licensed real estate appraiser in Los Angeles, California.


Google+ Mary Cummins, Mary K. Cummins, Mary Katherine Cummins, Mary Cummins-Cobb, Mary, Cummins, Cobb, wildlife, wild, animal, rescue, wildlife rehabilitation, wildlife rehabilitator, fish, game, los angeles, california, united states, squirrel, raccoon, fox, skunk, opossum, coyote, bobcat, manual, instructor, speaker, humane, nuisance, control, pest, trap, exclude, deter, green, non-profit, nonprofit, non, profit, ill, injured, orphaned, exhibit, exhibitor, usda, united states department of agriculture, hsus, humane society, peta, ndart, humane academy, humane officer, animal legal defense fund, animal cruelty, investigation, peace officer, animal, cruelty, abuse, neglect #marycummins #animaladvocates #losangeles #california #wildlife #wildliferehabilitation #wildliferehabilitator #realestate #realestateappraiser #realestateappraisal #lawsuit

Monday, February 6, 2017

Evanger's recalls Hunk of Beef because of Pentobarbital in a batch of food - Mary Cummins, Animal Advocates

Evanger's hunk of beef, cat, dog, food cva fda voluntary recall pentobarbital euthanasia drug

Evanger’s Voluntarily Recalls Hunk of Beef Because Of Pentobarbital Exposure in one Batch of Food

Animal Advocates' note: Pentobarbital is used to euthanize cats, dogs, pet animals. Cows are killed by captive bolt gun. No one would ever use pentobarbital to kill a cow as it has a long half life. It can cause major health problems for anyone or any animal who eats the cow. I don't believe someone killed a cow with pentobarbital. I personally believe that the supplier either fed his cows cats, dogs from a rendering plant or the supplier added some rendered cats, dogs from a rendering plant to the ground meat they sold to Evanger's. Euthanized cats, dogs are boiled at high temperatures so separate the fat from the protein. The fat an protein are sold as fishmeal.

Evanger's buys their beef from a supplier. I don't think Evanger's would knowingly buy meat which had pentobarbital in it. It's possible that the rendered animals made their way into the cows through the feed supplier. It is illegal to feed rendered animals to animals in the US. It's illegal to use it in pet or human food. It can only be sold to a non-US company. Generally it's sold to Asian shrimp farmers. Then the US buys the shrimp. I hope the beef supplier does not buy feed from China. That could be how it got in there.

Below is the release.

"For Immediate Release February 3, 2017 Evangers Dog & Cat Food Co
 1-847-537-0102

Out of an abundance of caution, Evanger’s Dog & Cat Food of Wheeling, IL is voluntarily recalling specific lots of its Hunk of Beef product because of a potential contaminant Pentobarbital, which was detected in one lot of Hunk of Beef Au Jus. Pentobarbital can affect animals that ingest it, and possibly cause side effects such as drowsiness, dizziness, excitement, loss of balance, or nausea, or in extreme cases, possibly death.

The specifically-identified lot numbers (as detailed below) of cans of 12-oz Hunk of Beef being voluntarily recalled were distributed to retail locations and sold online in the following States: Washington, California, Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, and were manufactured the week of June 6 – June 13, 2016.

Although pentobarbital was detected in a single lot, Evangers is voluntarily recalling Hunk of Beef products that were manufactured the same week, with lot numbers that start with 1816E03HB, 1816E04HB, 1816E06HB, 1816E07HB, and 1816E13HB, and have an expiration date of June 2020. The second half of the barcode reads 20109, which can be found on the back of the product label.

The subject recall affects 5 lots of food that were produced from its supplier’s lot of beef, which is specifically used for the Hunk of Beef product and no other products. To date, it has been reported that five dogs became ill and 1 of the five dogs passed away after consuming the product with lot number 1816E06HB13. Evanger’s is proactively issuing a recall voluntarily so as not to risk potential exposure to pentobarbital in the product.

All Evanger’s suppliers of meat products are USDA approved. This beef supplier provides us with beef chunks from cows that are slaughtered in a USDA facility. We continue to investigate how this substance entered our raw material supply.

Because we source from suppliers of meat products that are USDA approved, and no other products have had any reported problems, we are not extending the recall to other supplier lots. This is the first recall for Evanger’s in its 82 years of manufacturing. Although it has been verified that little or no product remains on store shelves, if consumers still have cans with the aforementioned lot numbers, he or she should return it to the place of purchase for a full refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company at 1-847-537-0102 between 10:00 AM – 5:00 PM Central Time, Monday - Friday."

###
Follow FDA
Follow @US_FDA on Twitter disclaimer icon
Follow FDA on Facebook disclaimer icon
Follow @FDArecalls on Twitter disclaimer icon
Recent Recalled Product Photos on FDA's Flickr Photostream disclaimer icon
Product Photos

http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm539900.htm?source=govdelivery&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates is a wildlife rehabilitator licensed by the California Department of Fish and Game and the USDA. Mary Cummins is also a licensed real estate appraiser in Los Angeles, California.


Google+ Mary Cummins, Mary K. Cummins, Mary Katherine Cummins, Mary Cummins-Cobb, Mary, Cummins, Cobb, wildlife, wild, animal, rescue, wildlife rehabilitation, wildlife rehabilitator, fish, game, los angeles, california, united states, squirrel, raccoon, fox, skunk, opossum, coyote, bobcat, manual, instructor, speaker, humane, nuisance, control, pest, trap, exclude, deter, green, non-profit, nonprofit, non, profit, ill, injured, orphaned, exhibit, exhibitor, usda, united states department of agriculture, hsus, humane society, peta, ndart, humane academy, humane officer, animal legal defense fund, animal cruelty, investigation, peace officer, animal, cruelty, abuse, neglect #marycummins #animaladvocates #losangeles #california #wildlife #wildliferehabilitation #wildliferehabilitator #realestate #realestateappraiser #realestateappraisal #lawsuit

Sunday, February 5, 2017

Georgia Aquarium non-profit animal entertainment "business" - Atlanta, Georgia EIN 58-2574918

Georgia Aquarium, non-profit, for-profit, animal entertainment business, atlanta, georgia, seaworld, shows, tricks, tanks EIN: 58-2574918
I was surfing the web when the below video popped up for the Super Bowl. The first screen on the video states they are a 501 3c non-profit organization that doesn't have to pay taxes. If you take a closer look, they are actually a SeaWorld like for-profit business with $471,000,000 in assets which brings in $78,000,000 per year.

Notice in the video that it looks just like SeaWorld. The marine animals are all doing forced tricks with unnatural objects. This is no different than SeaWorld. These animals are bought, taken in as babies and habituated to be a trained animal to sell tickets to a park. They are not released back to the wild but caged for life.



Here is their Guidestar page so you can see the huge income they make.

https://www.guidestar.org/profile/58-2574918

They state this is conservation, education when it's really just entertainment for humans.

I wrote an article about the difference between non-profit aquariums and for-profit marine entertainment parks like SeaWorld. There is no difference except in the way they formed their corporations. SeaWorld should have started as a non-profit. Some of these non-profits bring in much more money than for profit SeaWorld.

http://animaladvocatesmarycummins.blogspot.com/2014/11/when-is-non-profit-not-non-profit.html

Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates is a wildlife rehabilitator licensed by the California Department of Fish and Game and the USDA. Mary Cummins is also a licensed real estate appraiser in Los Angeles, California.


Google+ Mary Cummins, Mary K. Cummins, Mary Katherine Cummins, Mary Cummins-Cobb, Mary, Cummins, Cobb, wildlife, wild, animal, rescue, wildlife rehabilitation, wildlife rehabilitator, fish, game, los angeles, california, united states, squirrel, raccoon, fox, skunk, opossum, coyote, bobcat, manual, instructor, speaker, humane, nuisance, control, pest, trap, exclude, deter, green, non-profit, nonprofit, non, profit, ill, injured, orphaned, exhibit, exhibitor, usda, united states department of agriculture, hsus, humane society, peta, ndart, humane academy, humane officer, animal legal defense fund, animal cruelty, investigation, peace officer, animal, cruelty, abuse, neglect #marycummins #animaladvocates #losangeles #california #wildlife #wildliferehabilitation #wildliferehabilitator #realestate #realestateappraiser #realestateappraisal #lawsuit

Friday, February 3, 2017

Animal Advocates starts the #USDAchallenge as USDA removed all inspection, permit info from website

USDA AWA Animal Welfare Act APHIS Donald Trump removes all permit and inspection reports Mary Cummins Animal Advocates #USDAchallenge


UPDATE: 02/22/2017 USDA returned some documents 02/17/2017. They are here.

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalwelfare/sa_obtain_research_facility_annual_report

Here is the notice that some documents have been returned.

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/newsroom/news/!ut/p/z1/vVLLbsIwEPwajpadR_M4hooGEIVKECC-RJvYFBdih8SQ8vd1UC9QQdVLfdrVznh3dhZTvMZUwkm8gxZKwt7kKfWyycx9tvpzMolf3gYkSmbj_mhKbDJ9wqtrwGw59Eg0WCSLaWD1R6GD6WP-ElNMC6krvcUpVFvRZIWSmkud7UVeQ33ukQYyydumVqq8JI2GHd-qPeN1BlKqoyx4aRjNpZqfMwaadzGyieVfAmL3CLSAWp43QnN0rDpM17sqBMOpwyAgIWfICmwfuX5OULhxCuR6PnMs2LAQ4FbrTzGdVnLnRcTw6fU6brdlfwMe_JGaGfx7M8Sxh1cnwVucSFWXxr_5HyUOCR7_Zpm5CfFxONDIGNdZ9anx-t-dq8qkDJwz2m1eB45L0y8kEbZR/dz/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/?urile=wcm%3Apath%3A%2Faphis_content_library%2Fsa_newsroom%2Fsa_stakeholder_announcements%2Fsa_by_date%2Fsa-2017%2Fsa-02%2Fawa-website-update

02/08/2017 We uploaded some of the missing USDA files here.

https://archive.org/details/USDA_files

More files here

http://thememoryhole2.org/blog/aphis-annual-reports

We filed a FOIA request for all correspondence, email, faxes, voicemail in regard to the removal of the information from the USDA website. We also requested access to or a digital copy of all the items removed. Here is our FOIA request. We'll update this page with any responses to our request.

http://animaladvocates.us/foia_usda_02032017.pdf

Today the USDA just removed all permit information and inspection reports from their website. If you try to search for them, you get this message.

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalwelfare/enforcementactions

"Last Modified: Feb 3, 2017  Print
Courts are continuously issuing decisions that provide agencies with guidance on interpreting and applying laws applicable to the release of information to the public by the Federal government, including the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act. In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice maintains comprehensive guidance involving the Privacy Act, Freedom of Information Act, and other laws, and updates such guidance based on legal developments. APHIS, with the support from the Office of the General Counsel, continuously monitors these sources of information and makes refinements to APHIS’ practices, as needed.

Based on our commitment to being transparent, remaining responsive to our stakeholders’ informational needs, and maintaining the privacy rights of individuals, APHIS is implementing actions to remove documents it posts on APHIS’ website involving the Horse Protection Act (HPA) and the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) that contain personal information. These documents include inspection reports, research facility annual reports, regulatory correspondence (such as official warnings), lists of regulated entities, and enforcement records (such as pre-litigation settlement agreements and administrative complaints) that have not received final adjudication. In addition, APHIS will review and redact, as necessary, the lists of licensees and registrants under the AWA, as well as lists of designated qualified persons (DQPs) licensed by USDA-certified horse industry organizations to ensure personal information is not released to the general public.

Those seeking information from APHIS regarding inspection reports, research facility annual reports, regulatory correspondence, and enforcement records should submit Freedom of Information Act requests for that information. Records will be released when authorized and in a manner consistent with the FOIA and Privacy Act. If the same records are frequently requested via the Freedom of Information Act process, APHIS may post the appropriately redacted versions to its website. In addition, some enforcement records (such as initial decision and orders, default decisions, and consent decisions) are available on the USDA’s Office of Administrative Law Judge’s website (https://www.oaljdecisions.dm.usda.gov). For more information on preparing and submitting Freedom of Information Act requests, please visit https://efoia-pal.usda.gov/palMain.aspx."

This is most likely related to Donald Trump. He told all federal agencies such as the USDA not to give out any information. The USDA permit search is also down. It was here.

https://acissearch.aphis.usda.gov/LPASearch/faces/Warning.jspx;jsessionid=7f00000130d877a4b47a2b9d4b9ca181bc36536f1dce.e38Obx8Sb3yQby0Obh0Qe0

We have a USDA Class C exhibitor permit in order to keep sanctuary animals. We always post our permits and inspection reports as we've never had a violation ever since we first had the permit in 2003 14 years ago. We will continue to do so. Any organization that doesn't post their own USDA permits and inspection reports should be suspect. People shouldn't donate or give money to any organization, sanctuary or zoo that doesn't post their permits. Our permits and inspection reports are posted below. All of the documents online were redacted. Here is one such document. They never included our home address, any personal information or even copies of the signatures.



Animal Advocates hereby challenges all over USDA permit holders to post all of their permits and inspection reports. Please, share this post. #USDAchallenge #PostYourInspectionReports

For those that need permit or inspection report information, here is a sample Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request letter I sent. Edit this to suit your needs then email it to FOIA.Officer@aphis.usda.gov. Not having that information online is going to cause USDA to get bogged down with FOIA requests. That's why they put the information online in the first place.

December 1, 2014


USDA, APHIS, Animal Care
FOIA REQUEST
Tonya Woods, FOIA Director
Legislative and Public Affairs
Freedom of Information Act
4700 River Road, Unit 50
Riverdale, MD  20737

Dear FOIA Officer:

Pursuant to the federal Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, I request access to and copies of All emails, letters and faxes to/from/within the USDA which mention Tawni Angel, Jason Nester, Tawnis Ponies and Petting Farm, any other business name they have used for anything related to her cancelled USDA permit, current permit or any complaints. I specifically want to see her exhibiting, dealer, breeding and transport permits.

I would like to receive the information in electronic format. (Via email to ***.) I agree to pay reasonable duplication fees for the processing of this request.

If my request is denied in whole or part, I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions of the act. I will also expect you to release all segregable portions of otherwise exempt material.

I of course reserve the right to appeal your decision to withhold any information or to deny a waiver of fees.

I look forward to your reply within 20 business days, as the statute requires. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,



Mary Cummins

USDA Animal Advocates permit inspection reports #USDAchallenge Los Angeles, California Mary Cummins

USDA Animal Advocates permit inspection reports #USDAchallenge Los Angeles, California Mary Cummins

USDA Animal Advocates permit inspection reports #USDAchallenge Los Angeles, California Mary Cummins

USDA Animal Advocates permit inspection reports #USDAchallenge Los Angeles, California Mary Cummins

USDA Animal Advocates permit inspection reports #USDAchallenge Los Angeles, California Mary Cummins


Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates is a wildlife rehabilitator licensed by the California Department of Fish and Game and the USDA. Mary Cummins is also a licensed real estate appraiser in Los Angeles, California.


Google+ Mary Cummins, Mary K. Cummins, Mary Katherine Cummins, Mary Cummins-Cobb, Mary, Cummins, Cobb, wildlife, wild, animal, rescue, wildlife rehabilitation, wildlife rehabilitator, fish, game, los angeles, california, united states, squirrel, raccoon, fox, skunk, opossum, coyote, bobcat, manual, instructor, speaker, humane, nuisance, control, pest, trap, exclude, deter, green, non-profit, nonprofit, non, profit, ill, injured, orphaned, exhibit, exhibitor, usda, united states department of agriculture, hsus, humane society, peta, ndart, humane academy, humane officer, animal legal defense fund, animal cruelty, investigation, peace officer, animal, cruelty, abuse, neglect #marycummins #animaladvocates #losangeles #california #wildlife #wildliferehabilitation #wildliferehabilitator #realestate #realestateappraiser #realestateappraisal #lawsuit

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Alleged animal cruelty in production of "A Dog's Purpose" movie coming out soon - Animal Advocates

A Dog's Purpose, animal cruelty, dog, water, Birds and Animals Unlimited, Ray Beal, Raymond Beal, Canada, Animal Advocates
UPDATE: 02/03/2017 AHA just released the results of their investigation into themselves. They cleared themselves of all wrong doing, imagine that. Here is their report http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/nr-report_Redacted-2.pdf

As an employee for AHA we were told that the animals cannot be stressed or frightened. That is "abuse." The dog didn't die but it was still frightened. That is not allowed on set per AHA's own regulations.

AHA investigated themselves in the tragic deaths of horses in the movie "My Friend Flicka." They said the deaths were "unavoidable accidents." That's not what the Los Angeles Department of Animal Services said after their very thorough investigation. They said the deaths were avoidable. No horse should be allowed to run with a dangling lead. That's common sense. You wouldn't let a little kid run with long shoe laces untied. Here is the official report from the City. http://www.animaladvocates.us/Flicka_Incident.pdf    Here is the result of AHA's investigation into themselves. http://www.eonline.com/news/49785/report-accidents-fell-flicka-friends  I worked for AHA during this time though I wasn't on the Flicka set. One of the AHA horse experts said it was the inspector's fault. An immediate result was adding to the inspection manual that no horse should be allowed to run free with a long dangling lead.

01/23/2017 I thought Gavin's name sound familiar. We went to Beverly Hills High School together.

Gavin Polone producer of "A Dog's Purpose" just gave a statement about the incident and the American Humane Association (AHA). He stated "American Humane Association (AHA) is not an adequate protector of animals on set. They are not independent from the studios. They don't take a stand against abuse. They should have stopped this."

http://tmzvod-a.akamaihd.net/tmz/2017-01/23/0_rqf3japn_0_dibiz8d9.mp4

PETA has released a protest flyer.

http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/dogs-purpose-peta-flier.pdf

The animal trainers have released this statement. This doesn't change anything. The dog was frightened. Everyone admits that. This is considered "harm." They admit the dog got sucked under the water. That would have also been frightening for the dog. They pulled the dog out. He did not drown or have any permanent harm. Still, he was frightened. Per AHA you cannot allow the animals to be frightened to shoot a scene. We still don't know who was holding the dog and trying to force him in the pool. It had to have been someone with Birds and Animals Unlimited. It doesn't look like Beals or the other listed animal trainer.

http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/0123_a_dogs_purpose_statement.pdf

This is from Gavin from the Hollywood Reporter.

"Last Thursday, I went to Amblin's office and watched all the film shot on the day in question, as well as saw video from the trainers and still photographs. As with the TMZ video that you saw, two things were evident: 1) the dog handler tries to force the dog, for 35 to 40 seconds, into the water when, clearly, he didn’t want to go in; and 2) in a separate take filmed sometime later, the dog did go into the water, on his own, and, at the end, his head is submerged for about 4 seconds. These two things are absolutely INEXCUSABLE and should NEVER have happened. The dog trainer should have stopped trying to get the dog to go in the water as soon as the dog seemed uncomfortable, and the trainers should have had support under the dog as soon as he came to the side of the pool and/or had less turbulence in the water so he never would have gone under. The American Humane Association (AHA) representative who is paid by the production to “ensure the safety and humane treatment of animal actors,” as its website states, should have also intervened immediately on both of those parts of the filming. So should have whomever was running the set. Those individuals should be held accountable and never used again by that studio or its affiliates.

I also hold myself accountable because, even though I was not present, I knew and had written about how ineffective AHA has been over the years. Its monitors have been present when bad things have happened to animals on sets, not offering enough protection to stop those events and displaying no real protest after they occurred. Though AHA is the standard guarantor of animal safety on all studio productions and I was not consulted when they nor the dog trainers were hired, I should have fought with the studio to come up with alternatives to serve those functions. I didn’t, and there is nothing to mitigate my inaction. I’m deeply sorry about that."

Full link

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/gavin-polone-a-dogs-purpose-outcry-what-happened-whos-blame-967160

01/21/2017 The producer has supposedly seen the "original full video." That is impossible because that was someone's personal cellphone video. The producer could have only seen the professional video the cameraman shot from a different angle. Of course the cameraman is not going to be shooting when the animal is just getting used to the water. Cameraman would only film when they were ready to shoot it for the film.

The producer said that the dog was in the water earlier that day and was fine. They just wanted to shoot it from the other side. Dog was not trained to jump in the water on the other side. Dog got scared.

That story makes no sense. The trainer was trying to dip the dog in the water so he would realize the water is warm. That is on the audio on the video. If the dog had indeed been in the water earlier, he would have already known it was warm.  Dog also would have been wet and not dry.

Producer went on to say the dog was not physically harmed or killed. We realize that. Still, the dog was frightened. When I worked for AHA we had to make sure the animals were not frightened. They said dog chasing cats can't be induced by fear. They must train the animals to follow the other and make it appear to be chased. That dog was clearly frightened. Everyone admitted that. That is against AHA regulations. The dog doesn't have to die for it to be a violation of AHA regs or cruelty.

I think that was first time dog was getting into the water with the jets on. Why not put him in the water with the jets off then slowly turn them on so he can get used to it? If you look at the final cut, the dog jumps off a wooden ledge. There's no water in the pic. The next frame is from another angle with the dog going into the water. The dog did not jump into the water on the final film. I haven't seen the full movie, only the trailer.

The producer now asks the question "why didn't they take the video to the media 15 months ago when it was filmed? Why did they wait for the press junket?" The answer is clear. The dog was not injured or in danger of dying. There would be no reason to make it public instantly. PETA or whomever released the tape to TMZ a week before the opening of the film and press junket. The reason was to get full media attention on the issue. FTR I don't support everything PETA does. I'm against circus and zoo animals. I support sanctuaries. I think there can be some safe and humane exhibit of animals for education or positive media. This movie could have been that positive media. There was no reason to scare the dog like that.

They also should have tested the jets to see if the dog could get sucked under like he was. If you angle jets against a corner, it will cause animals, people to get sucked under. There's a place on some famous rapids where if you don't go straight through the middle, you will get sucked under and sucked to the bottom of the river. They can't even get the dead body out because the force of the swirling water keeps the body pressed to the rocks.

http://ew.com/movies/2017/01/20/dogs-purpose-author-additional-footage-paints-different-picture/

Here are the AHA guidelines.

"If any animal appears aggressive, stressed and/or charges, threatens or bites any
person or animal, it shall be removed immediately from the set and location."

https://www.americanhumane.org/app/uploads/2016/08/Guidelines2015-WEB-Revised-110315-1.pdf

01/19/2017 "There will be no premiere for "A Dog's Purpose" because the studio that produced it is still reeling from the video posted showing it's animal star in distress.

Amblin and Universal studios are still reviewing footage that syncs up with the video TMZ posted to determine what happened to Hercules when he clearly was recoiling as his trainer tried pulling him into the water. The studios say the dog is fine and was never abused.

The studios know lots of people are upset after seeing the video. The studios have also canceled the press junkets."

This is sad all the way around. I know the main producer, actors love animals and would never want to see them harmed. They hoped the movie would want to make people adopt pets from shelters which is why they teamed up with Best Friends. I hoped the same. I personally feel what happened with the dog on the second production team was the result of underlings just trying to get the shot no matter what. I don't know who is the guy holding the dog and trying to get him in the water. I don't think it's Bean because he looks different. It's also not the other animal trainer who looks different. No other animal trainers are credited in the film. Did they let anyone try to force the dog in the pool? If AHA was there, what went wrong? I was trained by them, worked for them for one day so I know that they don't really care about animals. Still, what went wrong here.

_________________

I will predict that nothing happens to the people involved.

"A Dog's Purpose" crew members are now under investigation by Canada's Chief Veterinary Office, and jail time is on the table if the agency finds any wrongdoing.
The CVO tells TMZ it received a formal complaint on Wednesday, and has begun looking into what went down on the set during filming in Winnipeg.
TMZ posted the video of Hercules, a German Shepherd, appearing terrified to get in churning water to shoot a scene for the movie. The trainer tried for about 40 seconds to put Hercules in the pool. The CVO says it wasn't involved with the filming, because a rep from the American Humane Association was on set. That rep, we've learned, has since been suspended.
The Office could levy a fine up to $10k and/or sentence offenders to up to 6 months in jail."

PETA confirmed that all the animals in the film came from Birds and Animals Unlimited in Acton, California. That is the website and Facebook page that has been shut down all day.

"The animal-rights group is targeting a specific animal supplier — Acton, CA-based Birds & Animals Unlimited.

According to PETA, a manager at BAU told its undercover investigator that they provided all the dogs for the film and Deadline confirmed this evening that BAU handled the dog in the video."

The producer stated this,

“I’m horrified by this,” said Polone. “The first thing I asked was, ‘Is the dog OK?’ He’s fine. But if I had seen that, I would have stopped it in a minute. People have to be held responsible for this. It was someone’s job to watch out for this kind of thing. Why didn’t they? This is something I’ve written about before, whether it be circus animals or animals on set. American Humane are supposed to be there supervising. That’s their job that someone is paid a lot of money to do. Why wasn’t this stopped? There needs to be a better system than this. That’s what I’ve called for in the past. I agree with PETA that they not only need to make sure animals are treated properly on set, but they also need to find out where the animals are kept outside of the set. To make sure they are treated properly at all times.”

"Animal Justice says it has filed complaints with the Winnipeg Humane Society, the Chief Veterinary Office of Manitoba, and the Winnipeg police department alleging violations of federal and provincial animal protection laws.

“Throwing a terrified German Shepherd into rushing water is blatant animal cruelty,” Camille Labchuk, a lawyer and executive director of Animal Justice, said in a news release.

“It is illegal to inflict suffering and anxiety onto animals, and there is no loophole that lets Hollywood moviemakers get away with abusing animals on a film set."

"Actor Josh Gad, who lends his voice to a dog in the film, issued a statement on Twitter saying he has asked the studio and production team for an explanation of what he calls "disturbing images."

He said that while the finished film is "one of the most beautiful love letters to animals I have ever seen," he was troubled by the video.

"I am shaken and sad to see any animal put in a situation against its will," Gad wrote. A publicist for the actor confirmed the post was authentic."

The scene is included in the movie. You can't use film where someone, an animal was harmed. That's law so people won't make snuff films or intentionally do a dangerous stunt. Below are a few frames from the trailers.

A Dog's Purpose, animal cruelty, dog, water, Birds and Animals Unlimited, Ray Beal, Raymond Beal, Canada, Animal Advocates

A Dog's Purpose, animal cruelty, dog, water, Birds and Animals Unlimited, Ray Beal, Raymond Beal, Canada, Animal Advocates
A Dog's Purpose, animal cruelty, dog, water, Birds and Animals Unlimited, Ray Beal, Raymond Beal, Canada, Animal Advocates

A Dog's Purpose, animal cruelty, dog, water, Birds and Animals Unlimited, Ray Beal, Raymond Beal, Canada, Animal Advocates
A Dog's Purpose, animal cruelty, dog, water, Birds and Animals Unlimited, Ray Beal, Raymond Beal, Canada, Animal Advocates
A Dog's Purpose, animal cruelty, dog, water, Birds and Animals Unlimited, Ray Beal, Raymond Beal, Canada, Animal Advocates

The producers just said that the dog "Hercules" was not forced to perform and he's fine. They stated the film "A DOG'S PURPOSE, produced by Amblin Entertainment and distributed by Universal Pictures, is a celebration of the special connection between humans and their dogs. And in the spirit of this relationship, the Amblin production team followed rigorous protocols to foster an ethical and safe environment for the animals.

While we continue to review the circumstances shown in the edited footage, Amblin is confident that great care and concern was shown for the German Shepherd Hercules, as well as for all of the other dogs featured throughout the production of the film. There were several days of rehearsal of the water scenes to ensure Hercules was comfortable with all of the stunts. On the day of the shoot, Hercules did not want to perform the stunt portrayed on the tape so the Amblin production team did not proceed with filming that shot.

Hercules is happy and healthy."

Sounds like bullshit to me.

Story gets worse! American Humane Association was on set monitoring the animal. The inspector said and did nothing! I was trained by AHA and worked for them for a day. They side with the filmmaker over the animals.

"The representative from the American Humane Association who was on the set of "A Dog's Purpose" has been suspended after officials saw video of a terrorized dog on set."

Disturbing video below showing an animal trainer forcing his dog into turbulent water who then goes under was posted on TMZ earlier today. The scene was part of the movie "A Dog's Purpose" which is coming out January 27, 2017.



The animal trainers listed for the film are Raymond Beal of Birds and Animals Unlimited and Brian Turi of Studio Animals. The film "A Dog's Purpose" partners with VCA and Best Friends. We sent a polite email asking about the footage to ir@vca.com ericr@bestfriends.org studioanimals@gmail.com California@birdsandanimals.com. We will post their reply when they reply. The man in the video does not look like Brian Turi. It looks like Ray Beal a little. He works with that type of dog. Here's a pic of him. I am not 100% positive that Ray is the person in the video. The person in the video appears to be balding and has red hair. Maybe it is the water safety person? I've asked all involved who it was but no response. Nonetheless the trainer and AHA person should have been watching out for the dog and not allowed that shot.

Ray Beal, Raymond Beal animal trainer "A Dog's Purpose" Birds and Animals Unlimited, california, cruelty, movie
This is from a behind the scenes of the movie. This is one of the handlers. It looks like Ray Beal. I wonder if the guy is the AHA person. We had to wear our shirts and hat on set. I worked for them for one day though went through a week of training.



Mary Cummins
of Animal Advocates is a wildlife rehabilitator licensed by the California Department of Fish and Game and the USDA. Mary Cummins is also a licensed real estate appraiser in Los Angeles, California.


Google+ Mary Cummins, Mary K. Cummins, Mary Katherine Cummins, Mary Cummins-Cobb, Mary, Cummins, Cobb, wildlife, wild, animal, rescue, wildlife rehabilitation, wildlife rehabilitator, fish, game, los angeles, california, united states, squirrel, raccoon, fox, skunk, opossum, coyote, bobcat, manual, instructor, speaker, humane, nuisance, control, pest, trap, exclude, deter, green, non-profit, nonprofit, non, profit, ill, injured, orphaned, exhibit, exhibitor, usda, united states department of agriculture, hsus, humane society, peta, ndart, humane academy, humane officer, animal legal defense fund, animal cruelty, investigation, peace officer, animal, cruelty, abuse, neglect #marycummins #animaladvocates #losangeles #california #wildlife #wildliferehabilitation #wildliferehabilitator #realestate #realestateappraiser #realestateappraisal #lawsuit