July 29, 2010
by Dane Johnson
According to news reports, the Sapphire Princess, an ship operated by Princess Cruises, struck and killed a juvenile humpback near Juneau, Alaska today. This whale’s death being caused by a recreational vessel, rather than by one in commercial shipping, highlights the increasing danger to cetaceans from ship strikes of all kinds.
Data published in a 2004 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”) Technical Bulletin documented that “injuries and deaths resulting from ship collisions with whales remain a significant threat.” An analysis of ship strikes by species showed that fin whales “are the most often reported species hit (75 records of strike), followed by humpback (44 records), North Atlantic right (38 records), gray (24 records), minke (19 records), southern right (15 records), and sperm whales (17 records).” NOAA admitted that the data “may represent only a fraction of the actual number of strikes,” likely because it relied on self-reporting by the vessels involved. Most of the impacts came from commercial vessels, but cruise ships accounted for about 14% of whale strikes.
Incredibly, fatal collisions between ships and whales occurred even in three National Marine Sanctuaries: Stellwagen Bank (humpback, fin, and right whales), Channel Islands (gray and several
unidentified whales), and the Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale sanctuary (humpback whales). 68% of whales included in the NOAA data died from the impacts.
U.S. shipping lanes were moved to address whales only in 2008 and only in one sanctuary. Nearly 5,000 ships transit the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary, home to endangered finback, humpback, and right whales, each year. Adding just ten to twenty minutes, depending on ship speed, to the travel time through the sanctuary allowed vessels to avoid the places where whales are most likely to cross. Estimates put the reduction in risk to cetaceans at around 81%.
Shipping lanes for cruises should be moved similarly. Economic barriers are often cited as arguments against rerouting sea lanes for whales—the need to move goods to market as fast as possible is offered as a compelling reason to risk the lives of critically endangered marine mammals. Such logic, however, isn’t really applicable to changing ship traffic in the cruise injury. Passengers—who probably book passages to places like Alaska hoping to see whales—would likely accept surcharges needed to offset slight increases in fuel costs, or be willing to shorten their voyages by an hour or so to allow a wide berth around whales. If sightings are from a greater distance, the knowledge that the very creatures contributing to the wonder of the trip remain alive to see should bring sufficient comfort to avoid impacting reservations.
Related Web Resources
AP, Cruise Ship Strikes Whale in Alaska, July 28, 2010.
NOAA, Large Whale Ship Strike Database (Jan. 2004).
EarthSky, David Wiley on Moving Shipping Lanes to Save Whales (Aug. 18, 2008).
July 12, 2010
by Dane Johnson
Emotional support animals have been proven to be extremely effective at helping those with psychiatric disabilities. These special animals provide therapeutic nurture and support for symptoms of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other mental health conditions.
Most people know that the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) gives disabled individuals with service animals the right to access places of public accommodation. Unfortunately, the ADA does not guarantee access for emotional support animals in public places. The ADA and other federal and state laws do, however, support the right to emotional assistance animals in housing.
Right to Emotional Support Animals in Housing
The Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and ADA Title II protect the right of people with disabilities to keep emotional support animals, even when a landlord’s policy prohibits pets. Like service animals, emotional support animals are not “pets.”
The law generally requires landlords to make an exception to “no pet” policies so that a tenant with a disability can fully use and enjoy his or her dwelling. In most housing complexes, so long as the tenant has a letter or prescription from an appropriate professional, such as a therapist or physician, and meets the definition of a person with a disability, he or she is entitled to a reasonable accommodation that would allow an emotional support animal in the apartment.
The definitions of “disability,” “reasonable accommodation,” and other terms can be both confusing and critical. Fortunately, helpful resources for people with disability and psychological service animals include an emotional support animal housing rights fact sheet published by the Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law. If you or loved ones are facing disability discrimination in the form of restrictions on an emotional support animal, contact Oregon animal law attorney Dane E. Johnson. We offer a free case evaluation to discuss your options. Call toll free (800) 714-3204 or use our online lawyer contact form.
Related Web Resources
Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, Fact Sheet, Right to Emotional Support Animals in “No Pet” Housing.
June 25, 2010
by Dane Johnson
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) has announced the granting of a full license to the vaccine against canine influenza virus (“CIV”), also known as H3N8. A conditional license was awarded on May 27, 2009, and the product has been in limited use as its safety has been evaluated. Manufacturer Intervet/Schering-Plough Animal Health recently issued a press release announcing the full approval.
According to the Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine, no “influenza viruses circulated in dogs until genetic changes in an equine influenza virus allowed this virus to spread efficiently in the canine population.” The H3N8 virus was first reported in and appeared to be confined to racing greyhounds, but it has since spread and caused respiratory disease in a variety of breeds in the general canine population.
Common symptoms appear to be persistent cough, purulent nasal discharge, and low-grade fever. Two canine influenza cases were reported in Oregon in 2005, but no known H3N8 outbreaks have appeared since then. The The Oregon Veterinary Medical Association (“VMA”) nevertheless points out that “the virus is considered to be endemic in the United States and cases could reappear in Oregon in the future.”
All dogs are now considered to be susceptible, although those that are kept in closed rooms with other dogs for at least six hours may be at greater risk. VMA notes that “if your dog stays at home and rarely contacts other dogs, its risk of contracting the virus is likely low. If your dog is boarded, goes to day care, or the dog park, it may be at a higher risk.”
University of Florida veterinary researcher Dr. Cynda Crawford, who discovered the canine influenza virus in 2004, has reported that “there were no side effects or safety issues [with the vaccine] in a field trial that included more than 700 dogs ranging in age from six weeks to 10 years and representing 30 breeds.” Given canine influenza’s potential to progress to secondary pneumonia if not treated properly and the vaccine’s apparent safety, owners of at-risk dogs should consider having them vaccinated.
Related Web Resources
Press Release, Intervet/Schering-Plough Animal Health, Nobivac® Canine Flu Vaccine Granted License by USDA (June 9, 2010).
Or. Veterinary Med. Ass’n, Canine Influenza (H3N8) Virus: Vaccine For Dogs Now Available (Dec. 15, 2009).
Iowa State Univ. Coll. of Veterinary Med., Fact Sheet: Canine Influenza (Jan. 2009).
Cynda Crawford, 10 Things to Know About the H3N8 Dog Flu, N.Y. Times, July 2, 2009.
June 7, 2010
by Dane Johnson
According to its website, Banfield “has become the largest pet general veterinary practice in the world, with more than 750 hospitals in neighborhoods across the U.S.” In a recently filed lawsuit, however, Dr. Robert Nix alleges that the company’s veterinary and business practices endangered animal patients and charged owners excessive fees for substandard care.
In a complaint filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court, Dr. Nix describes being told to help boost income by accepting animals in need of urgent care after hours at Banfield’s Nyberg Woods clinic in Tualatin. He asserts that the company planned to “take patients regardless of their needs and collect revenue from lab work and initial triage treatment. If a patient’s case was very serious, doctors would then call the [animal owner] after conducting some costly tests and ask them to take their pet to Tualatin Emergency Clinic.” Dr. Nix asserts that Banfield was ‘promising a service they knew they could not deliver and forcing pet owners to pay two veterinarians to treat their sick animal instead of one, while the sick or injured animal bore the risk of delay in medical treatment.”
The complaint further accuses the company of firing him for challenging veterinary care that he asserts fell seriously below professional standards and Oregon practice standards. Banfield reportedly denies the allegations contained in the 28-page complaint filed by Dr. Nix, the former chief of staff at Nyberg Woods. He claims that the discharge was wrongful because it was in retaliation for whistleblowing.
If you believe that your companion animal may have been harmed by an unprofessional veterinarian or veterinary technician, our Oregon animal law office may be able to help. Contact us for a free case evaluation.
Related Web Resources
Edie Lau, Veterinarian Fired from Banfield Sues Company, Veterinary Info. Network, Inc., June 1, 2010.
June 5, 2010
by Dane Johnson
Endangered species in the Gulf include five kinds of whales, Hawksbill, Kemp’s ridley, and leatherback sea turtles, sturgeon, sawfish, the West Indian manatee, and two coral species. The ESA prohibits “taking” any of them, which the law defines as meaning “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” “Taking” may include “significant habitat modification or degradation that kills or injures fish or wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns including breeding, spawning, rearing, migrating, feeding or sheltering.”
Announcing the intent to sue letter sent to British Petroleum, Mike Senatore, vice president for Conservation Law at Defenders of Wildlife emphasized that
BP must be held accountable for the grave threat posed to sea turtles, whales, seabirds and other endangered wildlife as the result of the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Not only does the oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico pose an immediate and long-term threat to endangered wildlife in the Gulf of Mexico, but the company’s unprecedented application of chemical dispersants poses additional risks.
Southern Environmental Law Center attorney Catherine Wannamaker added that the environmental organizations are
concerned about the oil-covered wildlife that we may see onshore, but we’re also extremely concerned about what’s happening below the surface of the Gulf of Mexico. This is shaping up as an unprecedented disaster for the people and wildlife of the Gulf. From plankton to endangered sperm whales to fishermen, BP has put an entire ecosystem at risk and must be held accountable.
Even if the oil torrent is plugged or slowed, the environmental disaster that started in the Gulf will continue expanding for decades. Oil and chemical dispersants will continue to spread through ocean currents, affecting sea life far from the Deepwater Horizon site. Wildlife is already being destroyed on an increasingly horrific scale, with the numbers of killed animals and birds far exceeding those found oiled but still alive.
Our Portland, Oregon animal law firm strongly supports aggressive litigation against BP for the full extent of the Deepwater Horizon debacle on wildlife. BP is supposedly paying for rescue efforts—but that’s the least that the multibillion dollar global corporation can do. Please join in holding it fully accountable by donating at the links below.
Related Web Resources
Southern Environmental Law Center
Defenders of Wildlife
NOAA, Endangered and Threatened Species and Critical Habitats under the Jurisdiction of the NOAA Fisheries Service: Gulf of Mexico
May 30, 2010
by Dane Johnson
Memorial Day marks the unofficial start of the summer season, and grills are soon to be fired up around the Northwest. Before putting out those burgers or steaks, however, consider the latest beef recall issued by the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection (“FSIS”) agency: 53,000 pounds of possible E. coli contaminated beef manufactured by Montclair Meat Co. The recall is Class I, which represents the highest degree of health risk.
FSIS microbiologists say the E. coli bacteria present in beef samples is a particularly dangerous strain. E. coli O157:H7 is a potentially deadly bacterium that can cause bloody diarrhea, dehydration, and in the most severe cases, kidney failure. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, E. coli infections sicken some 2000 people in the United States each year due to e. coli infections. Around three percent of those infected die. That’s an expensive price to pay for grilled meat.
Fortunately, vegan grilling recipes abound. Grilling vegan foods like hearty veggie burgers, marinated tofu, seitan skewers, and tempeh is both a safe and satisfying way to enjoy a healthier and more compassionate lifestyle. If you’re reluctant to abandon meat, at least taste what you’re missing. You’ll likely be pleasantly surprised, and you won’t have to worry about following safety practices required to protect against contamination in ground beef consumption. As the FSIS notes, the only way to be sure ground beef is cooked to a high enough temperature to kill harmful bacteria is to use a thermometer to measure the internal temperature.
If you or loved ones suffer from a serious food-borne illness, including E. coli infection, contact Portland animal law attorney and personal injury lawyer Dane E. Johnson. We provide a free legal consultation to evaluate injuries and help protect legal rights. Call toll free (800) 714-3204, or use our online product liability attorney contact form.
Related Web Resources
Vegan Grilling Guide 101: Green Tips, Foods, Tools
Press Release, USDA Food Safety & Inspection Service, California Firm Recalls Ground Beef Products Due to Possible E. coli O157:H7 Contamination
December 29, 2009
by Dane Johnson
AP is reporting another Class I recall of about 248,000 pounds of beef that may be contaminated with E. Coli bacteria. According to National Steak and Poultry, the processor, the recalled meat could be linked to illnesses in six states. The E. Coli strain involved is apparently one that has caused large-scale outbreaks of life-threatening illness via contaminated food and water. A similar recall involving processor Fairbank Farms was issued earlier in 2009
A Class I recall is issued in only the most serious cases of risk of personal injury or death. The U.S. Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service (“FSIS”) describes the E. Coli strain that may be contaminating the recalled meat as “a potentially deadly bacterium that can cause bloody diarrhea, dehydration, and in the most severe cases, kidney failure.” FSIS advises all consumers to safely prepare their raw meat products, including fresh and frozen, and only consume ground beef or ground beef patties that have been cooked to a temperature of 160° F. The government agency notes that the only way to be sure ground beef is cooked to a high enough temperature to kill harmful bacteria is to use a food thermometer to measure the internal temperature.
If you have yet adopted a vegan or vegetarian lifestyle, you should be aware that the meat recall includes the following products:
National Steak and Poultry Recalled Meat Products
- 4-ounce “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “SC68408.”
- 6-ounce “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “SP680608.”
- 8-ounce “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “SC68808”
- 9-ounce “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “SC68908.”
- “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY BONELESS BEEF TIPS,” with an identifying case code of “69108.”
- “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN STEAK” with an identifying case code of “XXSP68008.”
- “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY SAVORY SIRLOIN TIPS” with an identifying case code of “XX69008.”
- 5-ounce “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY BACON WRAPPED BEEF FILLET,” with an identifying case code of “23508.”
- “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY USDA SELECT BEEF SHOULDER MARINATED TENDER MEDALLIONS” with an identifying case code of “23289.”
- “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY 75% BONELESS BEEF TRIMMINGS,” with an identifying case code of “33575.”
- “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY BEEF TRIMMINGS,” with an identifying case code of “36545.”
- “NATIONAL STEAK AND POULTRY BEEF SIRLOIN PHILLY STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “88008.”
- 4-ounce “EGN BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “680425.”
- 7-ounce “EGN BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN TRI TIP STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “69725.”
- 9-ounce “EGN BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN TRI TIP STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “680925.”
- 7-ounce “KRM BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “680715.”
- 9-ounce “KRM BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “680915.”
- 12-ounce “KRM BONELESS BEEF SIRLOIN STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “680215.”
- 8-ounce “CARINO’S BONELESS BEEF OUTSIDE SKIRT STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “130874.”
- “CARINO’S BONELESS BEEF OUTSIDE SKIRT STEAK PIECES,” with an identifying case code of “13074.”
- “MOE’S BEEF STEAK,” with an identifying case code of “78027.”
Each package bears a label with the establishment number “EST. 6010T” inside the USDA mark of inspection, respective case codes cited above, and packaging dates of “10/12/2009,” “10/13/2009,” “10/14/2009,” or “10/21/2009.” These products were shipped to restaurants nationwide.
Fairbank Farms Recalled Meat Products
Trader Joes
- 1-pound packages of “TRADER JOE’S BUTCHER SHOP FINE QUALITY MEATS GROUND BEEF 85/15.”
- 1-pound packages of “TRADER JOE’S BUTCHER SHOP FINE QUALITY MEATS GROUND BEEF 80/20.” NOTE: The sell-by dates for the above two products may be October 6 or 7, 2009.
- 1-pound trays of “TRADER JOE’S BUTCHER SHOP FINE QUALITY MEATS GROUND BEEF PATTIES 96/4 EXTRA LEAN.”
- 1-pound trays of “TRADER JOE’S BUTCHER SHOP FINE QUALITY MEATS GROUND BEEF PATTIES 85/15.”
Price Chopper
- 1- and 2.5-pound trays of “PRICE CHOPPER MEATLOAF & MEATBALL MIX.”
- 1-pound trays of “PRICE CHOPPER EXTRA LEAN GROUND BEEF 96/4.”
- 1-pound trays of “PRICE CHOPPER FRESH GROUND BEEF CHUCK FOR CHILI 80% LEAN 20% FAT.”
Lancaster and Wild Harvest
- 1-pound trays of “LANCASTER BRAND 96/4 EXTRA LEAN GROUND BEEF.”
- 1- and 2-pound trays of “LANCASTER BRAND 90/10 GROUND BEEF.”
- 1-pound trays of “WILD HARVEST NATURAL 85/15 ANGUS GROUND BEEF.”
Shaw’s
- 1- and 2-pound trays of “SHAW’S FRESH GROUND BEEF 93/7.”
- 1-, 2- and 3-pound trays of “SHAW’S FRESH GROUND BEEF 80/20.”
- 1- and 3-pound trays of “SHAW’S FRESH GROUND BEEF 75/25.”
- 1.3-pound trays of “SHAW’S FRESH GROUND SIRLOIN BEEF PATTIES 90/10.”
- 1.3-pound trays of “SHAW’S FRESH GROUND ROUND BEEF PATTIES 85/15.”
- 1.3-pound trays of “SHAW’S FRESH GROUND BEEF PATTIES 80/20.”
- 3-pound trays of “SHAW’S FRESH GROUND BEEF PATTIES FAMILY PACK 80/20.”
- 1-pound trays of “SHAW’S ANGUS GROUND BEEF 85/15.”
- 1-, 2- and 3-pound trays of “SHAW’S FRESH GROUND ROUND BEEF 85/15.”
- 1-pound trays of “SHAW’S 90% NATURAL GROUND BEEF.”
- 1-pound trays of “SHAW’S 85% NATURAL GROUND BEEF.”
- 1-, 2- and 3-pound trays of “SHAW’S FRESH GROUND SIRLOIN 90/10.”
- 1-pound trays of “MEATLOAF & MEATBALL MIX.”
BJ’s
- 5-pound trays of “FRESH GROUND BEEF, CONTAINS 15 % FAT” patties.
- 3- and 5-pound trays of “LEAN GROUND BEEF, CONTAINS 7% FAT.”
- 2.5-pound trays of “MEATLOAF & MEATBALL MIX.”
Ford Brothers
- 3-pound trays of “FRESH GROUND BEEF, CONTAINS 20% FAT” patties.
Giant
- 1-pound trays of “GIANT EXTRA LEAN GROUND BEEF 96/4.”
- 1-pound trays of “GIANT MEATLOAF & MEATBALL MIX.”
- 1-pound trays of “GIANT NATURE’S PROMISE GROUND BEEF.”
- 1-pound trays of “GIANT NATURE’S PROMISE GROUND BEEF PATTIES.”
Each package bears the establishment number “EST. 492″ inside the USDA mark of inspection or on the nutrition label. These products were packaged on September 15 and 16, 2009, and may have been labeled at the retail stores with a sell-by date from September 19 through 28, 2009, unless otherwise noted above. Consumers should ask at their point of purchase if the products they have are subject to recall.
If you or loved ones have symptoms of E. Coli infection after consuming meat products, Portland Oregon personal injury lawyer and animal law attorney Dane E. Johnson can assess whether you may have a legal claim. We are also happy to provide free information on switching to a vegan diet. Contact us toll free for a no-cost, no-obligation case evaluation at (800) 714-3204 or online.
Related Web Resources
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Press Release, Oklahoma Firm Recalls Beef Products Due To Possible E. Coli O157:H7 Contamination (Dec. 24, 2009).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Press Release, New York Firm Recalls Fresh Ground Beef Products Due To Possible E. Coli O157:H7 Contamination (Oct. 31, 2009).
November 7, 2009
by Dane Johnson
The Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) warns that certain dog chews may be contaminated with Salmonella and pose health risks to both dogs and people. Consumers should not use Pig Ears and Beef Hooves pet treats manufactured by Pet Carousel. The affected pig ear products were packaged under the brand names Doggie Delight and Pet Carousel. The affected beef hooves were packaged under the brand names Choo Hooves, Dentley’s, Doggie Delight, and Pet Carousel. All sizes and all lots of these products made by Pet Carousel are included in this alert. The products were distributed nationwide in both bulk and retail packaging for sale in pet food and retail chain stores. Although no illnesses associated with these products have been reported yet, the FDA is advising consumers to avoid handling or feeding them.
According to the FDA, routine testing of the suspect pig ears detected a positive reading for Salmonella. This prompted an FDA inspection of Pet Carousel’s manufacturing facilities. During the inspection, the agency collected additional pet treat samples. Further analysis found Salmonella present in beef hooves, pig ears and in the manufacturing environment.
Salmonella can affect both humans and animals. People handling dry pet food and/or pet treats can become infected with Salmonella, especially if they have not thoroughly washed their hands after having contact with the treats or any surfaces exposed to these products. Consumers should dispose of these products in a safe manner by securing them in a covered trash receptacle.
Salmonella symptoms in humans
Healthy people infected with Salmonella may experience some or all of the following symptoms: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea or bloody diarrhea, abdominal cramping and fever. Although rare, Salmonella can result in more serious ailments including arterial infections, endocarditis (inflammation of the lining of the heart), arthritis, muscle pain, eye irritation, and urinary tract symptoms. Consumers exhibiting these signs after having contact with this product should contact their health care provider immediately.
Salmonella symptoms in dogs
Dogs with Salmonella infections may become lethargic and have diarrhea or bloody diarrhea, fever and vomiting. Some may experience only a decreased appetite, fever, and abdominal pain. Infected dogs can be carriers and infect other animals or humans. If your dog has consumed any of the affected products or is experiencing any of these symptoms, contact your veterinarian immediately.
If you or a loved dog have symptoms of Salmonella infection, Portland Oregon animal law attorney Dane E. Johnson can assess whether you may have a legal claim. Contact us toll free at (800) 714-3204 or in Oregon at (503) 975-8298. You may also contact us with information about your potential case online.
Related Web Resources
Press Release, FDA, Health Alert for Certain Pet Treats Made by Pet Carousel (Nov. 5, 2009).
October 30, 2009
by Dane Johnson
For animals, Halloween can be a frightening and even deadly time. As kids and parents get busy preparing to scare and be scared this October 31, it can be easy to forget that trick-or-treating brings risks to companion animals. Family cats, dogs, birds, and others may be exposed to traumatizing sights and sounds, as well as potentially toxic substances like chocolate.
The ASPCA has a helpful list of pet safety tips. Perhaps most important, common candy ingredients including chocolate and xylitol, a sweetener, may be highly dangerous to animals. Symptoms of chocolate poisoning include seizures, but also less obvious signs of distress like vomiting, diarrhea, hyperactivity, increased thirst, frequent urination, and increased heart rate. Xylitol can cause seizures, as well as lower blood sugar leading to liver failure. Even “healthy” treats like raisins and grapes may cause kidney failure in dogs and cats.
The wrappers containing Halloween candy are also a potential source of injuries to companion animals. Foil and cellophane packaging can cause choking or intestinal blockages.
Other Halloween activities may also turn the night dangerous for pets. Strangers may frighten sensitive animals, who may dart outside and become lost or hit by cars. Pet costumes may also provoke fear and stress. Tails may knock over lit pumpkins or other candles, putting both pets and people at risk of burns or causing property damage. Taking simple precautions like keeping the candy—as well as the cats and dogs—under control can help ensure that the Halloween frights don’t cause real scares.
The Law Office of Dane E. Johnson is an Oregon animal law and personal injury law firm ready to assist with all animal-related legal issues.Please contact us at (503) 975-8298 or visit our website. Portland, Oregon animal lawyer Dane Johnson offers a free case consultation.
Related Web Resources
ASPCA Halloween Safety Tips
Pet Poison Advice and Emergency Helpline
September 20, 2009
by Dane Johnson
Eminent primatologist Dr. Jane Goodall recently addressed students at Portland’s French School, bringing her message of hope for endangered species to the Rose City. Her visit was in conjunction with a keynote speech to the Association of Zoos and Aquariums annual conference at the Oregon Convention Center.
Dr. Goodall praised the work of some conservation programs in zoos. I tend to disagree with her views on the subject, at least with regard to the Oregon Zoo. Her tireless efforts to raise the level of understanding of the animals with whom we share the world, however, are inspiring beyond words.
Her visit adds to what has been a productive year for the study and practice of animal law in Oregon. The recent symposium on toxicology and animal testing was engaging, although the promise of proposed strategies to reduce and eliminate the use of animals in laboratories is a long, long way from the reality. The upcoming animal law conference at Lewis & Clark Law School should offer even more tools for animal attorneys.
Animal law can be a difficult practice for an lawyer because of the magnitude of the problems facing living beings of every species. But more law students are becoming exposed to the field every semester, and younger students inspired Dr. Goodall to do something for animals will have law programs that give them the opportunity. As Jane would certainly agree, that is a reason for hope.
