Tag Archives: Louisiana

Activist: We Need More Deadly Hurricanes

Posted on by
Reply

This week, of course, the major news is the ongoing disaster in New Orleans where Hurricane Katrina has forced the evacuation of the city and likely killed thousands of people. And if animal rights activist Rick Bogle had his way, there would be many more Katrinas.

On an animal rights mailing list devoted to primate research, Bogle posted a link to Tulane’s main web site, noting there was no mention yet of the status of the university’s primate research center, Covington.

Animal rights activist Jean Barnes replied to that e-mail to the effect that she had talked to a USDA official who said there were no primate deaths at Tulane, but that there were other animals that were stuck in the facility.

Bogle replied,

If there were no primate deaths at Covington over the past few days, then this must be the first time in a long time that a monkey hasn’t died. We need more Katrinas.

Barnes then replied,

Katrina would need to extend to DC to be most effective.

Animal rights activists always get angry when their critics charge that they care more about animals than people, but Bogle and Barnes demonstrate the casual disregard for human beings that is characteristic of many activists. A hurricane that likely killed thousands of people and caused upwards of $50 billion in damages is a good thing, and would be even better if it would land elsewhere.

Source:

Primfocus: Tulane. E-mail messages, Jean Barnes and Rick Bogle, September 1, 2005.

PETA, HSUS to Focus on Cockfighting Bans in Lousiana, New Mexico

Posted on by
Reply

With the recent Supreme Court decision that ended two years of efforts to overturn Oklahoma’s cock-fighting ban, and the defeat of a pro-cockfighting politician in Louisiana, the Humane Society of the United States and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals look to focus on enacting bans in Louisiana and New Mexico, the last two states in the United States where cockfighting is allowed.

PETA is focusing on New Mexico. In a press conference with Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez and actress Rue McClanahan, PETA’s Dan Mathews said,

Yes. Absolutely. We are targeting New Mexico.

Over the past few years, New Mexico has become a hot spot for filming Hollywood productios and Mathews hopes to convince producers to avoid the state until a ban on cockfighying is passed.

Cockfighting is already banned in 13 of New Mexico’s 33 counties, and in 29 of its cities, including Albuquerque. A proposed ban on cockfighting passed New Mexico’s state house earlier this year, but couldn’t get out of committee in the state Senate.

PETA wants the state to take up a cockfighting ban during its 60-day session that begins in Jaunuary. According to the Albuqurque Journal, a poll it took thsi summer found that two-thirds of registered voters supported a ban on cockfighting.

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, however, remains non-committal on a ban, with his spokesman telling the Albuquerque Journal,

Cockfighting is already banned in the majority of counties and municipalities. The governor is willing to discuss and consider any legislative measure after a full and thorough debate on all sides.

Meanwhile, HSUS is looking to push a ban in Louisiana, where its political action committee spent $250,000 in advertising against a pro-cockfighting candidate for U.S. Senate. HSUS’s Wayne Pacelle was quoted in The Guardian (UK) as saying,

We intend to eradicate this cruel, barbaric practice. My advice to anyone moving to Louisiana thinking it’s a cockfighting refuge is not to unpack their bags — it’s going to be a very short stay.

Sources:

PETA targets NM film industry over cockfighting. Dennis Domrzalski, New Mexico Business Weekly, November 15, 2004.

Cockfight ban gets TV star’s support. Kate Nash, Albuquerque Journal, November 16, 2004.

Final battle to rid the US of ‘barbaric’ cockfighting. Richard Luscombe, The Observor, November 21, 2004.

Pacelle on Effect of Cockfighting on Louisiana Senate Race

Posted on by
Reply

Earlier I mentioned speculation that an anti-cockfighting ad campaign by Humane Society of the United States’ political action committee may have helped Republican David Vitter become the first Republican senator from that state since Reconstruction. The Associated Press ran a story this week looking at the extent of HSUS’ campaign and what, if any, effect it had.

HSUS targeted Democratic U.S. House Rep. Chris John, who is pro-cockfighting. Louisiana has an odd election system which typically leads to two viable Democrats running against a single Republican. If no single candidate gets more than 50 percent of the vote, which frequently happens, there is a run-off between the top two vote getters. The upshot is that the Democrats had never lost using this system until this year (and are now talking about ditching this bizarre process).

According to the Associated Press, HSUS’ PAC spent $250,000 targeting John, including mailing 300,000 pieces of mail to white female voters that quoted John saying, “I strongly support the cockfighting industry in Louisiana.” The PAC also paid for a television ad which told viewers that John considers cockfighting to be a “family-type thing.”

Was that the ultimate determinant? The Associated Press notes that John was such a weak candidate that he actually lost his home parish of Acadia by 10,000 votes to Vitter. Not to mention that Vitter did a good job of portraying the conservative, cock-fighting supporter John as a liberal in a state that George W. Bush won by 15 points.

The Associated Press quotes HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle as saying,

Cockfighting wasn’t the most important issue, but it was a measure of personal character. Polls show that people really want to be proud of Louisiana, and to have someone who advocates cockfighting is someone who’s going to reinforce perceptions that Louisiana is backward.

. . .

There was a political judgment made — Chris John made it — that there’s this group of voters out there that thinks cockfighting is fine, and that the right political stance is, cockfighting is fine. This election demonstrated that that’s the wrong political position.

Personally, I think Vitter’s election shows just how Republican the South is becoming, but seeing a supporter of cockfighting lose out in the process certainly doesn’t hurt.

Source:

Animal rights group claims victory in Louisiana’s Senate race. Doug Simpson, Associated Press, November 21, 2004.

Is Pro-Cockfighting Stance a Political Liability in Louisiana?

Posted on by
Reply

The surprise election of Republican David Vitter to Louisiana’s open Senate seat has some Democrats wondering whether the pro-cockfighting position of the leading Democrat candidate cost them the election.

Vitter’s win was a major upset — a Republican had not been elected to the Senate in Louisiana since the end of Reconstruction.

The major problem the Democrats had is that no less than three Democrats ran for the office, splitting the vote and media attention between them.

But exit polls also showed that Vitter received 32 percent of the votes from white women — a surprisingly high number. According to The Times-Picayune,

Some Democratic women said they were turned off by [leading Democratic candidate] John’s support for the bloody sport of cockfighting, an issue that was highlighted by ads from an animal rights group.

Source:

La. Dems diagnose party ills after loss. Bill Walsh, The Times-Picayune (Louisiana), November 14, 2004.

Humane USA Targets U.S. Senate Candidate Chris John

Posted on by
Reply

Humane USA — an animal rights political action committee created by the Humane Society of the United States, The Fund for Animals and other groups — is targeting U.S. Senate candidate Chris John for his pro-cockfighting views.

John is part of a three-way race for an open U.S. Senate seat in Louisiana. He is running against Republican David Vitter and fellow Democrat John Kennedy. Both Vitter and Kennedy oppose cockfighting. Currently Vitter is leading the race polling at about 43 percent, but if no candidate receives a majority then a runoff election between the two top vote getters is held.

In article on its website, Humane USA says,

Chris John is clearly out of step with Louisiana voters. He has established himself as the go-to guy in Congress for the cockfighting industry. Louisiana is one of two states where cockfighting is legal, and John has been a staunch advocate of the activity in which roosters are pumped with drugs, sharp knives and razors are strapped to their legs, and they are forced to hack each other to death for entertainment and gambling.

When legislation to ban the interstate transport of fighting birds came up before the House Agriculture Committee, John tried to bottle it up. “Let me be very clear about my position on this,” he lectured. “I strongly support the cockfighting industry in Louisiana. I am adamantly opposed to this piece of legislation, and I will vote against it in every opportunity that I have.” He described cockfighting, in an interview with the Baton Rouge Advocate, as a “cultural, family-type” activity and “an industry that is very important to America.”

Humane USA is running ads against John in New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Shreveport and Lafayette, and also plans for a mass mailing target Democratic and independent women voters in the state.

Sources:

Humane Society targets Senate candidate Chris John. KATC.Com, October 2004.

Chris John Supports Extreme Animal Cruelty. Humane USA, October 2004.

PETA Activists Pester Neighborhood Children After Arriving After School Closure

Posted on by
1

You remember People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, right? The group that Ingrid Newkirk insisted on national television doesn’t target children? Well, for some reason it sent three activists to Capitol Middle School in Baton Rouge, Louisiana in May to convince children that it is wrong to eat chicken

What the PETA activists did not realize is that the school had let out two hours earlier, it being the last day of the 2003-2004 school year for Capitol Middle School students. So what did the three activists from an organization that doesn’t target children do then? Of course, they pestered neighborhood children walking or riding by the school.

The Advocate newspaper reports the following exchange that PETA’s Matt Rice had with a child outside the school,

Rice asked Keshon Bell, also a sixth-grader at Capitol Middle, whether she eats chicken.

“I eat chicken,” she said.

“That’s too bad. They’re just like dogs and cats,” Rice responded.

“Like that dog over there,” Bell said, pointing out a dog, perhaps dead, which had been lying in the middle of Gus Young Avenue, the whole time.

Afterward, Bell said eating chickens is wrong, repeating what the activists were saying in her own way.

“I know you can’t kill dogs and cats,” she said.

For an organization that targets their message entirely at adults, as Newkirk said, PETA spends an awful lot of time targeting children.

Source:

Animal-rights group too late to take message to school. Charles Lussier, The Advocate (Baton Rouge, Louisiana), May 21, 2004.

Louisiana's Hog-Dog Debate

Posted on by
Reply

Louisiana is one of the last states where cockfighting remains legal, but lately its another form of animal fighting — dogs vs. hogs — that has lawmakers looking to amend state law.

The state House in May overwhelmingly passed a ban on so called hog-dog competitions by a 77-24 margin with 4 abstentions. The proposed ban now goes not to the state Senate. The proposed bill reads, in part,

It shall be unlawful for any person to organize or conduct any commercial
or private event wherein there is a display of combat or fighting among one or more
domestic or feral canines and feral or domestic hogs and in which it is intended or
reasonably foreseeable that the canines or hogs would be injured maimed mutilated
or killed.

Apparently rural hunters use dogs to hunt down and kill feral pigs. They train such dogs by using domesticated hogs and hold competitions for such dogs. Opponents of the bill have tried to cast the dispute as one of urban dwellers failing to understand and denigrating rural culture.

Some of that criticism led to a gaping loophole to be added to the legislation that allows hog-dog competitions to be continued for training purposes,

The provisions of this Section shall not apply to any competitive event in
which canines which are trained for hunting or herding activities are released in an
open area or an enclosed area to locate and corner hogs and in which competitive
points are deducted if a hog is caught and held unless by such actions it is reasonably
foreseeable that the canines or hogs would be injured maimed mutilated or killed.

Proponents of the legislation say it is needed because local prosecutors simply won’t bring hog-dog competitions to court under existing animal cruelty statues, but are they really going to be excited to bring cases that will rest on whether or not a jury can be convinced that such a competition was or was not for training purposes? Color me skeptical.

The full text of the proposed bill can be read here.

Source:

Friends, foes spell out hog-dog positions. Chris Frink, The Advocate (Baton Rouge, Louisiana), May 12, 2004.

Louisiana House Bill 1244 – Ban on Hog-Dog Competitions

Posted on by
Reply

Regular Session 2004
HOUSE BILL NO 1244

BY REPRESENTATIVE TRICHE

ANIMALS Prohibits hog and canine fighting

AN ACT 1
To enact R S 14 102.19 relative to offenses affecting the public sensibility to create the 2
crime of hog and canine fighting to provide for exceptions to provide for penalties 3
to provide for definitions and to provide for related matters 4
Be it enacted by the Legislature of Louisiana 5
Section 1 R S 14 102.19 is hereby enacted to read as follows 6

102.19 Hog and canine fighting prohibited penalties 7
A It shall be unlawful for any person to organize or conduct any commercial 8
or private event wherein there is a display of combat or fighting among one or more 9
domestic or feral canines and feral or domestic hogs and in which it is intended or 10
reasonably foreseeable that the canines or hogs would be injured maimed mutilated 11
or killed 12
B It shall be unlawful for any person to intentionally do any of the following 13
for the purpose of organizing conducting or financially or materially supporting any 14
event as provided in Subsection A of this Section 15

1 Finance commercially advertise sell admission tickets or employ 16
persons 17
2 Own manage or operate any facility or property 18
3 Supply breed train or keep canines or hogs 19
4 Knowingly purchase tickets of admission 20
1

1
Page 2
3


HLS 04 1930 REENGROSSED
H B NO 1244

Page 2 of 3
C The provisions of this Section shall not apply to any competitive event in 1
which canines which are trained for hunting or herding activities are released in an 2
open area or an enclosed area to locate and corner hogs and in which competitive 3
points are deducted if a hog is caught and held unless by such actions it is reasonably 4

foreseeable that the canines or hogs would be injured maimed mutilated or killed 5
D The provisions of this Section shall not apply to the lawful hunting of 6
hogs with dogs or the use of canines for the management farming or herding of hogs 7
which are livestock 8
E The provisions of this Section shall not apply to Uncle Earl’s Hog Dog 9
Trials as defined in R S 49 170.10 10
F Whoever violates the provisions of this Section shall be fined not more 11
than one thousand dollars or imprisoned for not more than six months or both 12
G For the purposes of this Section hog shall include a pig swine or boar 13

DIGEST
The digest printed below was prepared by House Legislative Services It constitutes no part
of the legislative instrument

Triche HB No 1244
Abstract Provides for the crime of hog and canine fighting
Proposed law provides that it shall be unlawful for any person to organize or conduct any
commercial or private event wherein there is a display of combat or fighting among one or

more domestic or feral canines and feral or domestic hogs and in which it is intended or
reasonably foreseeable that the canines or hogs would be injured maimed mutilated or
killed

Proposed law provides that it shall be unlawful for any person to intentionally do any of the
following for the purpose of organizing conducting or financially or materially supporting
any hog and canine fighting event

1 Finance commercially advertise supply materials sell tickets of admission or
employ persons

2 Own manage or operate any facility or property
3 Supply breed train or keep canines or hogs
4 Knowingly purchase tickets of admission

Proposed law provides that this crime shall not apply to any competitive event in which
canines which are trained for hunting or herding activities are released in an open or
enclosed area to locate and corner hogs and in which competitive points are deducted if a
hog is caught and held unless by such actions it is reasonably foreseeable that the canines
or hogs would be injured maimed mutilated or killed
2

2
Page 3

HLS 04 1930 REENGROSSED
H B NO 1244

Page 3 of 3
Proposed law further provides that this crime shall not apply to lawful hunting with dogs or
the use of canines for the management farming or herding of hogs which are livestock

Proposed law creates an exception to the crime for Uncle Earl’s Hog Dog Trials as defined
in present law

Proposed law provides penalties of a fine of not more than 1,000 and imprisonment for not
more than six months or both

Proposed law defines hog as a pig swine or boar
Adds R S 14 102.19
Summary of Amendments Adopted by House

Committee Amendments Proposed by House Committee on Administration of Criminal
Justice to the original bill

1 Revises the bill to prohibit dog and canine fighting and adds activities which are
prohibited

2 Creates an exception for Uncle Earl’s Hog Dog Trials hunting and the use of
canines for the management farming or herding of hogs

3 Creates an exception for any competitive event in which canines which are

trained for hunting or herding activities are released in an enclosed area to locate
and corner hogs and in which competitive points are deducted if a hog is caught
and held unless by such actions it is reasonably foreseeable that the canines or
hogs would be injured maimed mutilated or killed

Summary of Amendments Adopted by House
House Floor Amendments to the engrossed bill
1 Added an additional exclusion from proposed law prohibitions for certain
competitive events involving the release of hogs into an open area

2 Added an additional exclusion from proposed law prohibitions for the use of
canines for the management farming or herding of hogs which are livestock

3 Added definition of a hog

Louisiana’s Hog-Dog Debate

Posted on by
Reply

Louisiana is one of the last states where cockfighting remains legal, but lately its another form of animal fighting — dogs vs. hogs — that has lawmakers looking to amend state law.

The state House in May overwhelmingly passed a ban on so called hog-dog competitions by a 77-24 margin with 4 abstentions. The proposed ban now goes not to the state Senate. The proposed bill reads, in part,

It shall be unlawful for any person to organize or conduct any commercial
or private event wherein there is a display of combat or fighting among one or more
domestic or feral canines and feral or domestic hogs and in which it is intended or
reasonably foreseeable that the canines or hogs would be injured maimed mutilated
or killed.

Apparently rural hunters use dogs to hunt down and kill feral pigs. They train such dogs by using domesticated hogs and hold competitions for such dogs. Opponents of the bill have tried to cast the dispute as one of urban dwellers failing to understand and denigrating rural culture.

Some of that criticism led to a gaping loophole to be added to the legislation that allows hog-dog competitions to be continued for training purposes,

The provisions of this Section shall not apply to any competitive event in
which canines which are trained for hunting or herding activities are released in an
open area or an enclosed area to locate and corner hogs and in which competitive
points are deducted if a hog is caught and held unless by such actions it is reasonably
foreseeable that the canines or hogs would be injured maimed mutilated or killed.

Proponents of the legislation say it is needed because local prosecutors simply won’t bring hog-dog competitions to court under existing animal cruelty statues, but are they really going to be excited to bring cases that will rest on whether or not a jury can be convinced that such a competition was or was not for training purposes? Color me skeptical.

The full text of the proposed bill can be read here.

Source:

Friends, foes spell out hog-dog positions. Chris Frink, The Advocate (Baton Rouge, Louisiana), May 12, 2004.

Judge Rules Against Louisiana Sheriff Who Declared Cockfighting Cruel

Posted on by
Reply

Although Louisiana is one of the last two states where cockfighting is legal, Caddo Parish Sheriff Steve Prator had nonetheless cited cockfighters since November 2003 under the parish’s animal cruelty law. In early February, however, state Judge Charles Scott ruled that Prator must cease enforcing the local animal cruelty statute where it is in conflict with the state statute, meaning the cockfights must be allowed to go on.

Scott said the case was not about whether or not cockfighting was barbaric, but rather whether local animal cruelty statutes could trump the state statute. In his decision, Scott wrote,

Some may call it barbaric. Some may call it sport. Others may call it business. Whatever your view, this case is about whether persons in Caddo Parish may rely on state law, which does not prohibit cockfighting, or whether they are subject to fine and/or jail under the parish ordinance.

When citizens of this state, and those visiting from outside this state, cannot rely on state law to govern their conduct but must instead be fearful of criminal penalties from a parish ordinance which is in conflict with state law, the residual police power of the state has been abridged by the conflicting ordinance and cannot stand.

Prator said that his office would immediately end its efforts to block a couple of local cockfighting arenas. Prator told the Shreveport Times,

We were just awaiting the judge to tell us which law to enforce, and so now we’ve got that and we’ll act accordingly. Our job is not to determine the morality of an activity, but to enforce any and all laws applicable to that activity. In this case the judge says we should not enforce the parish law and therefore we won’t. It doesn’t really ruffle my feathers.

Humane Society of the United States’ Wayne Pacelle had attended the hearing when the judge heard from both sides and said he was disappointed by the outcome. “We’re disappointed that the judge is going to allow this animal cruelty to continue in Caddo Parish,” Pacelle told the Shreveport Times. “It seems a clear matter of law that the parish can decide for itself to outlaw instigated fights between animals.”

Sources:

Judge: Caddo sheriff can’t stop cockfights. Don Walker, Shreveport Times (Louisiana), February 4, 2004.

Judge’s ruling allows cockfighting in Caddo Parish. Associated Press, February 3, 2004.